DerekClements Croome. Creatingtheproductiveworkplace EFNSpon2000.

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/279190533
Creating the Productive Workplace
Book · January 2000
CITATIONS READS
98 7,497
1 author:
D. J. Clements-Croome
University of Reading
171 PUBLICATIONS 2,229 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Intelligent Liveable Cities View project
Transdisciplinary Workplace Research Network View project
All content following this page was uploaded by D. J. Clements-Croome on 13 October 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Creating the Productive
Workplace
In an increasingly competitive environment, companies are being forced to think harder than
ever about the way they work, and how they can improve profitability. Creating the Productive
Workplace provides a critical, multidisciplinary review of the factors affecting workplace
productivity.
Productivity is a key issue for individual companies as well as the national economy as a
whole. With 70–90% of the costs of running an organisation consisting of the salaries of the
workforce, small increases in worker productivity can reap high financial returns. Many
studies have shown that productivity at work bears a close relationship to the work
environment. This book sets out the most important factors and evidence behind this
phenomenon, and offers solutions to providing creative work environments which are
conducive to productivity. Contributions are made by an international team of experts:
Bill Bordass Derek Clements- Michel Cabanac

Croome
Cary Cooper Roy Davis Charles E. Dorgan
John Doggart Francis Duffy Mathab Farshchi
Max Fordham Volker Hartkopf Marshall Hemphill
John Jukes Stephen Kaplan Walter Kroner
Adrian Leaman David Mudarri Jean Neumann
David A. Schwartz Valerie Sutherland Hidetoshi Takenoya
Jackie Townsend David Wyon Jennifer Veitch
This book is essential reading for company directors, facilities and estates managers, interior
designers, architects and building environmental engineers. It is also a text for undergraduates
and postgraduates studying these disciplines and related subjects, particularly those related
to intelligent buildings.
Derek Clements-Croome is Professor of Construction Engineering in the Department of

Construction Management and Engineering at the University of Reading, UK.
Workplace
Edited by Derek Clements-Croome
London and New York

First published 2000 by E & FN Spon, an imprint of Routledge
11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE
Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada

by Routledge
29 West 35th Street, New York, NY 10001
This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2001.
E & FN Spon is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group
© 2000 E & FN Spon; Chapter 11, © Adrian Leaman and Bill Bordass
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any
form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented,
including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system,
without permission in writing from the publishers.
The publisher makes no representation, express or implied, with regard to the accuracy of the
information contained in this book and cannot accept any legal responsibility or liability for
any errors or omissions that may be made.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book has been requested
ISBN 0–419–23690–2 (Print Edition)

ISBN 0-203-02781-7 Master e-book ISBN
ISBN 0-203-17281-7 (Glassbook Format)
Contents
List of figures xii

List of tables xv
List of contributors xvii
Foreword xix
Preface xx
PART I
Creativity, environment and people I
1 Indoor environment and productivity 3

DEREK CLEMENTS-CROOME
2 Creativity in the workplace 18

JACKIE TOWNSEND
3 Consciousness, well-being and the senses 29

The nature of consciousness 30

Architecture and the senses 33
Multi-sensory experience 34
Well-being and productivity 37
4 Pleasure and joy, and their role in human life 40

MICHAEL CABANAC
The behavioural final common path 40

Sensory pleasure 41
Pleasure and comfort 44
Conflicts of motivations 45
vi Contents
From pleasure and comfort to joy and happiness 45

Optimisation of behaviour 47
Conclusions 48
5 Emotion and the environment: the forgotten dimension 51

MAHTAB AKHAVAN FARSHCHI AND NORMAN FISHER
Introduction 51
Purpose, intention and goal-directed behaviour 52
Environmental meaning and evaluation 52
The social aspect of attitude 53
Sensory experience 53
Imperceptibility 54
Perception 55
The nature of emotion 55
Types of emotion 57
Environment and behaviour 60
Emotions as a crucial component of environmental
meaning 62
Can we assign affective appraisals for spaces? 63
Development of a conceptual model for affective appraisal
of spaces 64
Conclusions 66
6 A broad definition of comfort as an aid to meeting

commitments on carbon dioxide reduction 71
MAX FORDHAM
7 Stress and the changing nature of work 77

VALERIE SUTHERLAND AND CARY L. COOPER
Introduction 77
‘Change’ as a source of stress 78
Counting the cost of mismanaged stress 79
The workplace – change and more change! 80
Diagnosing occupational stress 85
Options for the management of stress in the workplace 86
Primary level interventions – preventive stress management
strategies 86
Secondary level interventions – preventive stress
management strategies 87
Contents vii
Tertiary level interventions – curative stress management

strategies 88
Conclusions 88
PART 2
The economic case for productivity 9I
8 The economics of enhanced environmental services in buildings 93

DAVID H. MUDARRI
Magnitude of economic loss associated with poor indoor

environments 93
Problems with the market for indoor environmental
quality 94
Public policy remedies 97
9 Assessment of link between productivity and indoor air quality 107

CHARLES E. DORGAN AND CHAD B. DORGAN
Introduction 107
Objectives 108
Assumptions 108
Results 109
Definitions 110
Research methodology 112
Results of research 115
Conclusions and future research requirements 124
PART 3
The nature of productivity I27
10 Assessment and measurement of productivity 129

DEREK CLEMENTS-CROOME AND YAMUNA KALUARACHCHI
The analytic hierarchy process 132

Subjective measurements and design of questionnaire 134
Occupant and environmental survey of buildings 137
Case study 1: office building in London 138
Case study 2: office building in Maidenhead 151
Conclusions 162
viii Contents
11 Productivity in buildings: the ‘killer’ variables 167

ADRIAN LEAMAN AND BILL BORDASS
Introduction 167
Terminology 170
Objectives 171
‘Killer’ variables 171
Conclusions 186
12 Individual control at each workplace: the means and the

potential benefits 192
DAVID P. WYON
Introduction 192
The need for individual control 193
Delegation of control 194
Existing means of delegating control to the individual 194
The expected benefits of delegating control 196
Delegation of control in the office of the future 196
Estimating how much thermal microclimate control is
required 197
Acceptable levels of fan noise for individual thermal
control 200
Estimating the productivity impact of providing individual
control 202
A field experiment on individual control: the West Bend
Mutual study 204
Summary 204
13 Creating high-quality workplaces using lighting 207

JENNIFER A. VEITCH
Introduction 207
From light to vision 209
Activation, arousal, and stress 211
Beliefs, expectations, and emotions 213
Conclusions 216
Contents ix
PART 4
Concentration and thinking 225
14 Attention and performance in the workplace 227

ROY DAVIS
The nature of skills 228

The use of information in training 230
Different ways of presenting information 230
Using visual symbols/icons to convey information or
instructions 231
Stimulus–response compatibility 234
Relating psychological variables to physical variables 239
How to take account of the user? 240
15 Concentration and attention: new directions in theory and

assessment 242
DAVID A. SCHWA RTZ AND STEPHEN KAPLAN
Introduction 242
What constitutes mental effort? 242
Goals and obstacles 243
Mental fatigue 244
Mental effort and mental fatigue in the workplace 245
Is the banishment of effort a useful strategy? 245
Sources of job interference 246
Consequences of fatigue 246
Strategies of intervention 247
Assessing the effect of an intervention 248
The importance of multiple measures 254
Conclusions 254
PART 5
Case studies 257
16 Managerial and employee involvement in design processes 259

JEAN E. NEUMANN
The problem 259

The case of ‘no windows’ 260
The case of the colour-coordinated floors 261
x Contents
The case of a great building that does not work 262

Attending to social and organisational perceptions 263
Managerial and employee involvement in
decision-making 266
Points of involvement in design and construction
processes 269
Summary 271
17 The Intelligent Workplace: a research laboratory 272

VOLKER HARTKOPF AND MARSHALL HEMPHILL
Total building performance 272

ABSIC 274
Exogenous developments 275
The Intelligent Workplace: a ‘lived-in’ laboratory 275
Major innovations 276
Significance of the IW 279
Anticipated outcomes 279
18 Air-conditioning systems of the KI Building, Tokyo 281

HIDETOSHI TAKENOYA
Special systems 281

Thermal environment 281
Fragrance environment 285
Airflow fluctuation control 288
Biomusic 291
Diversifying workspaces 292
Sound masking 293
Occupant satisfaction 293
19 Employee productivity and the intelligent workplace 295

WA LTER M. KRONER
Towards an ERW research agenda 295

The impact of ERWs on productivity and satisfaction: an
insurance company’s office environment 296
Conclusions 301
Contents xi
20 Future design – guidelines and tools 304

JOHN DOGGART
Comfort temperatures 305

Comfort cooling 306
Window design and daylight 306
Nightlight 307
Controls 307
Finishes 308
Building sickness 308
Building form 309
The benefits of good design 310
Evaluation 310
Conclusions 311
21 Optimising the working environment 313

JOHN H. JUKES
PART 6
The future 32I
22 New ways of working: a vision of the future 323
FRANCIS DUFFY
A legacy of resentment 323

The catalytic function of design in a time of change 324
A supply-side innovator 325
Two demand-side innovators 326
New ways of working – the price of relevance 328
The equation linking supply and demand 329
Measuring efficiency and effectiveness 331
A vision of the future 332
Appendix. Creating the Productive Workplace: Summary of

Conference held at Westminster Central Hall, London,
29–30 October 1997 334
Can we design for productivity? 334

People, concentration and work 338
Best practice in gaining a competitive edge 340
The future for workplace and environmental design 342
Conclusions 345
Figures
1.1 Factors which affect productivity 11

4.1 Pleasure and displeasure reported by a subject in response to
thermal stimuli 41
4.2 Direct calorimetry of the heat loss by a hypothermic subject’s
hand when dipped into highly pleasant cold water at 20°C 42
4.3 Pleasure and displeasure reported by a fasted subject in
response to a repeated gustatory stimulus 43
4.4 Fig. 4.1 data simplified to a 3 × 3 matrix 44
4.5 Mechanism by which a behaviour that produces displeasure
can be chosen by a subject if another behaviour that produces
pleasure is simultaneously chosen 46
4.6 Increase in discomfort rate and in the error of performance
observed over various arm positions 47
4.7 Results obtained in the golf video-game for the subject with
the highest correlation between performance and affective
experience 48
5.1 Conceptual framework for cognitive stages in information
processing 53
5.2 Circular ordering of mood descriptors 59
5.3 A conceptual model for the appraisal of spaces 65
6.1 Temperature plotted against predicted mean vote for five types
of clothing 74
8.1 Annual expenses projections with and without energy/IAQ
upgrades 101
8.2 Net revenue comparison for a single lease with and without
energy/IAQ upgrades 102
8.3 Twenty-year net annual summary with and without
energy/IAQ upgrades 103
10.1 The analytic hierarchy process 133
10.2 Does the physical office environment affect well-being? 142
10.3 Does the physical office environment affect productivity? 143
List of figures xiii
10.4 Personal control over temperature 144

10.5 Personal control over lighting 145
10.6 Main human factors influencing productivity: all floors 148
10.7 Main human factors influencing productivity: fourth floor 148
10.8 Relative importance of system factors with respect to ability
to perform: fourth floor 149
10.9 Relative importance of system factors with respect to
motivation: third floor 149
10.10 Does the physical office environment affect well-being? 155
10.11 Does the physical office environment affect productivity? 155
10.12 Personal control over temperature 156
10.13 Personal control over lighting 156
10.14 Main human factors influencing productivity: all floors 160
10.15 Main human factors influencing productivity: ground floor,
left wing 160
well-being: all floors 160
well-being: first floor, left wing 161
11.1 Perceived productivity question used in Building Use
Studies surveys 170
11.2 Relationship between perceived control and productivity
decline as buildings perform better 174
11.3 Response time question used in Building Use Studies surveys 177
11.4 Relationship between perceived speed of response in dealing
with heating, lighting and ventilation complaints and
perceived productivity for twelve study buildings 178
11.5 Relationship between perceived quickness and perceived
productivity 179
11.6 Dissatisfaction and window seats 181
11.7 Ratio of measured to design density by primary circulation
and support space for fourteen office buildings 182
11.8 Size of working group and perceived control no. 1 184
11.9 Size of working group and perceived control no. 2 185
13.1 Lighting quality: the integration of individual well-being,
architecture and economics 218
14.1 Analog and digital clock displays 231
14.2 Traffic signs from the Highway Code (1996) 232
14.3 Alternative signs prohibiting the passage of pedestrians 233
14.4 Shapes similar to those used by Köhler (1929) and Davis
(1961) 234
14.5 Visual displays of the kind used for pilots of military aircraft 235
14.6 Types of stimulus–response compatibility 236
14.7 Door latch, Barcelona Metro, Line 1 237
xiv List of figures
14.8 Door latch, British Rail InterCity toilets 238

14.9 Numeric keypad layouts for telephone, calculator/computer,
cash-point 239
15.1 Hidden figure task 249
15.2 Letter cancellation task 251
15.3 Category match task items grouped by category 252
15.4 Sample page of category match task 253
16.1 Continuum of degrees or range of participation in decision-
making 267
16.2 Concentric circles of preferred involvement in content issues 268
16.3 Points of potential involvement in design and construction
processes 269
17.1 The Intelligent Workplace, on the rooftop of the Margaret
Morrison Building at Carnegie Mellon 276
17.2 Longitudinal section through the Intelligent Workplace 277
17.3 Floor plan of the Intelligent Workplace 278
18.1 Atrium at the KI Building 282
18.2 Traces of markers in the atrium 283
18.3 Air distribution flow in the atrium 284
18.4 Thermal environment in the atrium 284
18.5 Stratification in the atrium: summer 285
18.6 Post-occupancy evaluation for thermal environment of
the atrium: summer 286
18.7 Atrium fragrance control system 287
18.8 Atrium fragrance control scenario 288
18.9 Predicted fragrance density distribution in the atrium 288
18.10 Fragrance density of supply air from AHU 289
18.11 Fragrance density of return air to AHU 289
18.12 Post-occupancy evaluation for fragrance control 290
18.13 1/f distribution 290
18.14 Percentage variance of a and ß waves 291
18.15 Cross-section of the VAV air diffuser 292
18.16 Occupant satisfaction with the indoor environment 293
19.1 Changes in productivity over the course of the study 299
19.2 Total increase in productivity in the new building with ERWs 300
20.1 Health and productivity in the office 308
22.1 Adding value and minimising cost 330
22.2 The efficiency/effectiveness balance 331
Tables
1.1 Characteristics of brain rhythms 3

1.2 Importance ratings of various design factors 6
4.1 Joy is to happiness what pleasure is to comfort 46
8.1 BOMAI survey: office tenant moves and changes 95
8.2 IFMA survey: top five complaints of corporate tenants 95
8.3 Some typical office building expenses 96
8.4 Proposed elements of an integrated building environment
and energy policy 99
8.5 Changes in effective revenues after improvements 103
9.1 Summary of worker productivity benefits 110
9.2 Summary of total productivity benefits 111
9.3 Distribution of all and specific building types by wellness
categories 118
9.4 Building inventory data 120
9.5 Annual productivity benefits 123
10.1 Proportions of male/female occupants, case study 1 138
10.2 Types of work, case study 1 138
10.3 Working hours, case study 1 139
10.4 Dissatisfaction with job and indoor environment, case
study 1 140
10.5 Satisfaction/dissatisfaction with various factors, case study 1 140
10.6 Self-projected possible improvements in productivity
through improved conditions, case study 1 144
10.7 Cited presence of adverse environmental conditions, case
study 1 146
10.8 Levels of stress and dissatisfaction, case study 1 147
10.9 Proportions of male/female occupants, case study 2 151
10.10 Types of work, case study 2 151
10.11 Working hours, case study 2 152
10.12 Dissatisfaction with job and indoor environment, case
study 2 152
10.13 Satisfaction/dissatisfaction with various factors, case study 2 153
xvi List of figures
10.14 Self-projected possible improvements in productivity

through improved conditions, case study 2 156
10.15 Cited presence of adverse environmental conditions, case
study 2 157
10.16 Occurrence of symptoms, case study 2 158
10.17 Levels of stress and dissatisfaction, case study 2 159
11.1 Relationships between control and perceived
productivity for office workers in eleven UK buildings
surveyed in 1996–97 173
11.2 Associations between perceived control and productivity
for eleven study buildings and five perceived control
variables 175
11.3 Relationships between quickness and perceived
productivity for office workers in eleven UK buildings
surveyed in 1996–97 179
11.4 Overall comfort scores by size of workteam for a single
office building 184
11.5 Performance means by ventilation type for twelve
Australian office buildings 188
12.1 Range of individual control required for a given
percentage to be satisfied 198
12.2 Subjective percentage dissatisfied with road noise in the
DTU experiment 201
12.3 Levels of noise and thermal control range for a given
percentage dissatisfied 202
12.4 Group average performance for four task types with
IC = 0 K (no individual control) 203
12.5 Performance improvement with IC = ±3 K 203
13.1 Lighting guidelines for productive workplaces 217
17.1 Organising performance criteria for evaluating the
integration of systems 273
17.2 ABSIC members 274
19.1 Estimated median changes in productivity by cause 299
20.1 Acceptable temperatures and time periods 305
20.2 Indicators of healthy buildings 309
20.3 Benefits of good design 311
Contributors
Bill Bordass Principal, William Bordass Associates, London

Professor Michel Cabanac Department of Physiology, Université Laval Quebec
Derek Clements-Croome Professor of Construction Engineering, University of Reading
Cary Cooper BUPA Professor of Organizational Psychology and Health, Manchester
School of Management, University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology
Roy Davis Emeritus Professor of Psychology, University of Reading
John Doggart Director of ECD Energy and Environment Ltd, London
Professor Charles E. Dorgan PE Director, HVAC&R Center, University of Wisconsin,
Madison
Dr Francis Duffy Founder, DEGW Plc, London
Mathab Farshchi Research Fellow, Advanced Construction Technology, University of
Reading
Norman Fisher Professor of Project Management, University of Reading
Professor Max Fordham Max Fordham & Partners, London
Professor Dr. Eng. Volker Hartkopf Centre for Building Performance & Diagnostics,
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh
Marshall Hemphill Hemphill Interior Technologies, Lancaster, Pennsylvania
John Jukes Optimum Workplace Environments Ltd, Old Coulsdon, Surrey
Stephen Kaplan Professor of Psychology and of Computer Science & Engineering, University
of Michigan
Walter Kroner Professor of Architectural Research, Rensselaer School of Architecture,
New York
xviii List of contributors
Adrian Leaman Principal, Building Use Studies Ltd, London

Dr David H. Mudarri Indoor Environment Division, US Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington
Dr Jean Neumann Senior Consulting Social Scientist, Organisational Change and
Technological Innovation Programme, The Tavistock Institute of Human Relations,
London
David A. Schwartz, Department of Psychology, University of Michigan
Dr Valerie Sutherland Sutherland-Bradley Associates, Glasgow
Hidetoshi Takenoya Chief Engineer, Kajima Design Europe Ltd, London
Jackie Townsend Director, Greystone International, Brighton
Dr Jennifer Veitch Research Officer, National Research Council of Canada, Institute for
Research in Construction, Ottawa, Ontario
Professor David P. Wyon Research Fellow, Johnson Controls Inc, Milwaukee and
International Centre for Indoor Environment and Energy, Technical University of
Denmark
Foreword
by Nick Raynsford MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State

Minister for Construction and London
Buildings provide the environment in which the business community operates, and their
procurement and operation represent a considerable business cost. Getting this environment
right clearly holds the potential for better performance of both human and physical resources,
and thus significant rewards to business and the wider economy. On an individual level, our
working environment can have a major impact on our attitudes to our work, and in turn on
our personal efficiency and productivity.
To realise this potential, we have to understand better the whole-life performance and
economics of buildings. We must also gain a greater understanding of the potentially significant
– but currently poorly understood – linkages between the productivity of building occupants
and the operation of the internal building environment.
My Department has made improving the productivity of non-domestic buildings one of
the four key themes of its new Sustainable Construction research and innovation programme.
We have called for proposals to improve understanding of the business benefits of effective
building design, and to generate more practical guidance and exemplars, so that clients and
occupiers can make informed decisions about improved design and management of indoor
environments. We are looking particularly at collaborative, multi-disciplinary, ways of tackling
the issues. Our aim is to make sure that the overall performance of buildings is enhanced.
That is why this book is so timely and why I am delighted to be associated with it. The
book highlights the issues employers and everyone who designs and commissions buildings
need to address to create more productive and, above all, more sustainable workplaces. This
will be good for individual employees, businesses, communities and the natural environment
now and in the future. I very much hope that readers of the observations and suggestions
contained in the following pages will be inspired to make or seek positive changes to their
workplace.
Preface
The culture of living and working is undergoing accelerating social and technological changes.
The release of creative energy in people is vital for them as individuals as well as for
communities and society at large. Creative self-fulfilment leads to vitality in nations. There
is recognition now that the daily rhythms of life need to be appreciated; there is also a need
to understand how we think and concentrate and under what conditions our performance
diminishes or improves. A high level of sustained focused concentration is necessary for a
high level of productivity. Environments for working in are becoming more fluid to meet
changing work patterns and to deal with all the different ways we need to think and
communicate during any single working day. This book opens up some solutions but also
poses many problems which, it is hoped, will provoke some thought and ideas for the future.
This book is partly based on the proceedings of a conference entitled ‘Creating the
Productive Workplace’ held in London in October 1997. Over 200 people attended. Delegates
came from a wide range of disciplines, including those who are interested in acquiring
knowledge about human behaviour in buildings, and those who have to design and manage
buildings in practice. I would like to thank the team that helped me to compose this conference,
which included John Doggart from Energy Conscious Design (ECD), Nigel Oseland from
British Research Establishment Ltd, and Aubrey Rogers from Bournemouth University. The
administration was admirably executed by Peter Russell and Lilian Slowe, of Workplace
Comfort Forum, together with their team of helpers. I would also like to pay tribute and give
thanks to the sponsors and associates who have supported the event financially and with
time and advice.
Sponsors: The Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR);
Energy Efficiency Best Practice programme; Clearvision Lighting Limited; RMC Group plc;
Trigon Limited.
In Association with: Association of Consulting Engineers; British Council for Offices;
British Institute of Facilities Management (BIFM); Building Research Establishment Limited
(BRE); Building Services Research & Information Association (BSRIA); Construction Industry
Preface xxi
Council; Construction Industry Environmental Forum; De Montfort University (Department

of Design Management); ECD Energy & Environment Limited; Ecological Design Association;
Energy Design Advice Scheme (EDAS); European Intelligent Building Group; University of
Bournemouth (Department of Product Design & Manufacture); University of Reading
(Department of Construction Management & Engineering).
I would also like to thank Maureen Taylor and John Jewell for their usual diligence in
helping to prepare the manuscript.
Derek Clements-Croome
Reading, October 1998
Part 1
Creativity, environment
and people
Chapter 1
Indoor environment and

productivity
In the journal of the British Council for Offices entitled Office (Summer 1997) it is reckoned
that ‘advanced building intelligence’ should increase the productivity of occupants by 10 per
cent annually as well as improving efficiency to satisfy owner occupiers. In contrast, ‘standard
intelligence’ can improve efficiency by 8 per cent annually and improve efficiency which
results in a payback within two to four years. The argument is that in an intelligent building
there is less illness and absenteeism. Intelligent buildings do not mean that masses of technology
are necessary. Simple adaptable building forms combined with appropriately specified building
services and technologies should result in a high-quality business value intelligent building.
Three major UK studies were carried out in 1997–98 on productivity: by SBS Business
Solutions and the Building Research Establishment; by the Post Office Property Holdings
Policy Planning and Development Group; and by the University of Reading in conjunction
with several industrial partners.
At a fundamental level we need to understand the nature of concentration. It is now
possible to measure brain rhythm patterns very easily (Dowson, 1997) and to diagnose
these scans; feedback frequencies can be used to correct deficiencies. Table 1.1 gives the
characteristics of the various brain rhythms.
Table 1.1 Characteristics of brain rhythms
Brain rhythm Frequency (Hz) Characteristics
Delta 0.5–3 Deep sleep

Theta 3–7 Dreaming; artistic, creative, intellectual thought;
meditative concentration
Alpha 7–12 Conscious relaxation
Beta 12–30 Concentration; autonomic, processes; emotional states
Gamma 30–60 Unknown but possibly linked to various psychological
Lambda 60–120 states
4 Clements-Croome
The beta and theta rhythms are related to various states of concentration. As
people tire, the beta rhythm reduces and the alpha rhythm increases.
We need to see if brain rhythm patterns are influenced by the environment. For
example fragrances do have effects on the central nervous system but brainwave patterns
can be affected by the subject’s beliefs and thoughts about the stimulus (Klemm et al.,
1991; Torii et al., 1988; Lorig and Roberts, 1990).
Traditionally, thermal comfort has been emphasised as being necessary in buildings,
but is comfort compatible with health and well-being? The mind and body need to be
in a state of health and well-being for work and concentration. This is a prime prerequisite
for productivity. High productivity brings a sense of achievement for the individual as
well as increased profits for the work organisation. The holistic nature of our existence
– and productivity is one example of this – has been neglected because knowledge
acquisition by the classical scientific method has dominated research. This method is
controlled but limited; the world of reality is uncontrolled, subjective and anecdotal
but nevertheless is vitally important if we are to understand systems behaviour.
Personal experiences count. On this basis it is possible to reconsider comfort in terms
of the quality of the indoor environment and employee productivity.
Bedford (1949) interprets health as meaning bodily efficiency, well-being and safety.
For hundreds of years empirical observations have suggested that the quality of the air
has a profound influence on health. There are many examples of seamen, people
working in cotton factories, spinners and many other industrial workers being affected
by the environment (Croome and Roberts, 198; Bedford, 1949). Most of this work
makes deductions about the effect of the environment on productivity based on
absenteeism rates, sickness records and incidents of accidents. In most heavy industries
the relationship between work output and temperature is very clear. This early work
also indicates that exceptionally competent workers are less affected by difficult
atmospheric conditions than those of ordinary capacity. There are abundant studies
that show a general pattern where work performance, as well as the likelihood of
accidents, depends on mental alertness. This can be disturbed by fatigue, lethargy,
alcohol, drugs and the environment. Lethargy, for example, is one feature found to be
prevalent in buildings exhibiting sick building syndrome (SBS). Sickness records are
difficult to analyse because sickness may be due to several causes, some of which have
nothing to do with the environment in the workplace. Nevertheless, comparative
trends between places which have good or not so good environments are worth while.
Dorgan (1994) analysed some 50,000 offices in the USA to see how they met
ASHRAE (American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Airconditioning Engineers)
Standards 62-1989 and 55-1992. About 20 per cent could be classified as healthy
buildings and always met the standards during occupied periods; about 40 per cent
Indoor environment and productivity 5
were generally healthy buildings and met the standards during most occupied periods;
30 per cent were unhealthy buildings and failed to meet the standards during most
occupied periods; 10 per cent of the buildings had positive SBS in which more than 20
per cent of the occupants complained of more than two SBS symptoms, and frequently
as many as six of the more common SBS symptoms.
Health is the outcome of a complex interaction between the physiological, personal
and organisational resources available to the individual and the stress placed upon
them by their physical environment, work, and home life. A deficiency in any one of
these factors increases the stress and decreases human performance.
Illness symptoms occur when the stress on a person exceeds their ability to cope
and where resources and stress both vary with time so that it is difficult to predict
outcomes from single causes. SBS is more likely with warmer room conditions, and
this also means wasteful energy consumption. When temperatures reach uncomfortable
levels, output is reduced. On the other hand, output improves when high temperatures
are reduced by air-conditioning. When temperatures are either too high or too low,
error rates and accident rates increase. While most people maintain high productivity
for a short time under adverse environmental conditions, there is a temperature threshold
beyond which productivity rapidly decreases (Lorsch and Abdou, 1993). Mackworth
(1946) found that overall the average number of errors made per subject per hour
increased at higher temperatures, and that the average number of mistakes per subject
per hour under the various conditions of heat and high humidity was increased at
higher temperatures, especially above 32°C. Vernon (1936) demonstrated relative
accident frequencies for British munitions plant workers at different temperatures,
and found that the accident frequency was a minimum at about 20°C in three factories.
Pepler (1963) showed that variations in productivity in a non-air-conditioned mill
were influenced by temperature changes, although absenteeism was apparently not
related to the thermal conditioning; on average an 8 per cent productivity increase
occurred with a 5K decrease in temperature. All these aspects help to promote a well-
designed building. The importance of various factors is summarised in Table 1.2: it can
be seen that natural daylight and ventilation are rated highly, but green issues and the
use of atria are also significant.
Clearly, any building that does not maximise its natural daylighting is likely to be
unpopular with office occupiers. The high value attributed to the use of windows
rather than air-conditioning partly reflects the generally low level of effectiveness
achieved by air-conditioning in many buildings, but also, more fundamentally, the
inherent need for natural light and good views out of the building.
Wilkins (1993) reports that good lighting design practice, particularly the use of
daylight, can improve health without compromising efficiency. Concerns about the
6 Clements-Croome
Table 1.2 Importance ratings of various designs factors (Ellis, 1994)
Importance
Feature Very Quite Not very Not at all
Best use of natural daylight 57% 31% 10% 1%

Ventilation using windows 30% 4% 25% 3%
Thermal design for building 12% 40% 36% 6%
Energy-saving green design 15% 36% 37% 8%
Use of atria & glazed streets 4% 20% 52% 18%
detrimental effects of uneven spectral power distribution and low-frequency magnetic

fields are not as yet substantiated. Wilkins (1993) states that several aspects of lighting
may affect health, including (i) low-frequency magnetic fields; (ii) ultraviolet emissions;
(iii) glare; and (iv) variation in luminous intensity. The effects of low-frequency
magnetic fields on human health are uncertain. The epidemiological evidence of a
possible contribution to certain cancers cannot now be ignored, but neither can it be
regarded as conclusive. The ultraviolet light from daylight exceeds that from most
sources of artificial light. Its role in diseases of the eye is controversial, but its effects
on skin have been relatively well documented. The luminous intensity of a light source,
the angle it subtends at the eye, and its position in the observer’s visual field combine
to determine the extent to which the source will induce a sensation of discomfort or
impair vision. Glare can occur from the use of some of the lower intensity sources,
such as the small, low-voltage, tungsten–halogen lamps. It is reasonable to suppose
that in the long term, glare can have secondary effects on health and that visible
flickering can have profound effects on the human nervous system. At frequencies
below about 60 Hz flickering can trigger epileptic seizures in those who are susceptible;
in others it can cause headaches and eye-strain. Wilkins (1993) concludes that the
trend towards brighter high-efficiency sources is unlikely to affect health adversely,
and may indeed be advantageous. The trend could have negative consequences for
health if it were shown that the increasing levels of ambient light at night affect
circadian rhythms. Improvements in brightness and the evenness of spectral power
may be beneficial. In particular, the move towards a greater use of daylight is likely to
be good for both health and performance.
In many buildings, users report most dissatisfaction with temperature and
ventilation, while noise, lighting and smoking feature less strongly. The causes lie in
the way in which temperature and ventilation can be affected by changes at all levels in
the building hierarchy, and, most fundamentally, by changes to the shell and services.
In comparison, noise, lighting and smoking are affected mainly by changes in internal
layout and workstation arrangements, which can often be partly controlled by users.
There are some indications that giving occupants greater local control over their
environmental conditions improves their work performance, their work commitment
and morale, which all have positive implications for improving overall productivity
within an organisation. Building users are demanding more control of fresh air, natural
light, noise and smoke. A lack of control can be significantly related to the prevalence
of ill-health symptoms in the office environment; there is a widespread agreement that
providing more individual control is beneficial. Work by Burge et al. (1987)
demonstrated the relationship between self-reports of productivity and levels of control
over temperature, ventilation and lighting, and showed that productivity increases as
individual control rises across all the variables.
Intervention to ensure a healthy working environment should always be the first
step towards improving productivity. There are very large individual differences in the
tolerance of sub-optimal thermal and environmental conditions. Even if the average
level of a given environmental parameter is appropriate for the average worker, large
decrements in productivity may still be taking place among the least tolerant.
Environmental changes which permit more individual adjustment will reduce this
problem. Productivity is probably reduced more when large numbers work at reduced
efficiency than when a few hypersensitive individuals are on sick leave. Wyon (1993)
states that commonly occurring thermal conditions, within the 80 per cent thermal
comfort zone, can reduce key aspects of human efficiency such as reading, thinking
logically and performing arithmetic by 5–15 per cent.
Lorsch and Abdou (1994a) summarise the results of a survey undertaken for industry
on the impact of the building indoor environment on occupant productivity, particularly
with respect to temperature and indoor air quality. They also describe three large
studies of office worker productivity with respect to environmental measurements,
and discuss the relationship between productivity and building costs.
It is felt in general that improving the work environment increases productivity.
Any quantitative proof of this statement is sparse and controversial. A number of
interacting factors affect productivity, including privacy, communications, social
relationships, office system organisation, management, and environmental issues. It is
a much higher cost to employ people who work than it is to maintain and operate the
building, hence spending money on improving the work environment may be the most
cost-effective way of improving productivity. In other words, if more money is spent
on design, construction and maintenance and even if this results in only small decreased
absenteeism rates or increased concentration in the workplace, then the increase in
investment is highly cost-effective (Woods, 1989).
According to a report by the National Electrical Manufacturers Association in
8 Clements-Croome
Washington, DC (NEMA, 1989), increased productivity occurs when people can

perform tasks more accurately and quickly over a long period of time. It also means
that people can learn more effectively and work more creatively, and hence sustain
stress more effectively. Ability to work together harmoniously, or cope with unforeseen
circumstances, points towards people feeling healthy, having a sense of well-being,
having high morale and being able to accept more responsibility. In general people will
respond to work situations more positively. At an ASHRAE Workshop on ‘Indoor
Quality’ held in Baltimore in September 1992 the following productivity measures
were recommended as being significant:
• absence from work, or workstation

• health costs including sick leave, accidents and injuries
• interruptions to work
• controlled independent judgements of work quality
• self-assessments of productivity
• speed and accuracy of work
• output from pre-existing work groups
• cost for the product or service
• exchanging output in response to graded reward
• volunteer overtime
• cycle time from initiation to completion of process
• multiple measures at all organisational levels
• visual measures of performance, health and well-being at work
• development of measures and patterns of change over time.
Rosenfeld (1989) describes how when air-conditioning was first conceived it was
expected that the initial cost of the system would be recovered by an increased volume
of business. He quotes an example where the initial cost of the air-conditioning system
for an office building is about £100 per m 2, so that if the average salary is £3,000 per
m2 and there is an occupancy of 10 m2 per person, then adding 10 per cent to the cost
of the system is justified if it increases productivity by as little as 0.33 per cent. Such
small differences are difficult to measure in practice. Rosenfeld (1989) shows a
relationship between the savings in working hours and the incremental cost of the
system for a range of salaries, and concludes that an improvement in indoor air quality
can be more than offset by modest increases in productivity. This leads to the general
conclusion that high-quality systems which will have higher capital costs can generate
a high rate of return in terms of productivity. In addition, systems will be efficient, be
effective, have low energy consumptions and consequently achieve healthier working
environments with lower CO2 emissions.
Holcomb and Pedelty (1994) attempt to quantify the costs of potential savings that
may accrue by improving the ventilation system. The increase in cost can be offset by
the gain in productivity resulting from an increase in employee work time. Higher
ventilation rates generally result in improved indoor air quality. Collins (1989) reported
that 50.1 per cent of all acute health conditions were caused by respiratory conditions
due to poor air quality. Cyfracki (1990) reported that a productivity increase of 0.125
per cent would be sufficient to offset the costs of improved ventilation. It should be
mentioned again that some studies have shown a decrease in SBS symptoms with
increased ventilation rates (Samimi and Seltzer, 1992) while others have not (Moray,
1989). Holcomb and Pedelty (1994) conclude that although there is some inconsistency
there is sufficient evidence to suggest an association between ventilation rates, indoor
air quality, SBS symptoms and employee productivity.
In one case study reported by Lorsch and Abdou (1994b) it is not clear whether the
drop in productivity was due to a reduction in comfort, the loss of individual control
or frustration due to being inconvenienced. According to Pepler and Warner (1968)
people work best when they are slightly cool, but perhaps not sufficiently cool for it
to be termed discomfort, and should not be too cool for too long.
Lorsch and Abdou (1994b) conclude that temperatures which provide optimum
comfort may not necessarily give rise to maximum efficiency in terms of work output.
The difficulty here is that this may be true for relatively short periods of time, but if
a person is feeling uncomfortable over a long period of time it may lead to a decrement
in work performance. However, there is a need for more research in this area. It almost
seems that for optimum work performance a keen sharp environment is needed which
fluctuates between comfort and slightly cool discomfort.
It is much more difficult to test the effects of temperature on mental than on
physical performance. For example, the lowest industrial accident rate occurs around
20°C and rises significantly above or below this temperature. The other problem is the
interaction with other factors which contribute towards the productivity. Motivated
workers can sustain high levels of productivity even under adverse environmental
conditions for a length of time which will depend on the individual.
Lorsch and Abdou (1994b) analyse several independent surveys which show that
when office workers find the work space environment comfortable, productivity tends
to increase by as much as 5–15 per cent when air-conditioning is introduced, in the
opinion of some managers and researchers. These are, however, only general trends;
there are few hard data and some findings are contradictory. Kobrick and Fine (1983)
conclude that it is difficult to predict the capabilities of groups of people, never mind
individuals, in performing different tasks under given sets of climatic conditions.
10 Clements-Croome
A study for the Westinghouse Furniture Systems Company in Buffalo, New York
(BOSTI, 1982) suggested that the physical environment for office work may account
for a 5–15 per cent variation in employees’ productivity. The general conclusion was
that people would do more work on an average work day if they were physically
comfortable.
Woods et al. (1987) reported that satisfaction and productivity vary with the type
of heating, ventilation or air-conditioning system. Central systems appeared to be
more satisfactory than local ones, the most important factor being whether there is
cooling or not. In one study on user-controlled environmental systems by Drake
(1990), the ability to have local control was important in maintaining or improving job
satisfaction, work performance and group productivity, while reducing distractions
from work. For example, some users reported that they wasted less time taking informal
breaks compared to times when environmental conditions were uncomfortable. They
were also able to concentrate more intensively on their work. The gain in group
productivity from the user-controlled environmental system amounted to 9 per cent.
A number of studies suggest that a small degree of discomfort is acceptable, but it has
to be confined to a level which does not cause distraction.
Work by Kamon (1978) and others shows that heat can cause lethargy which not
only increases the rate of accidents but can also seriously affect productivity. Bedford
(1949) concluded that there was a close relationship between the external temperature
and the output of workers. Deteriorating performance is partially attributable to
somnolence due to heat. Schweisheimer (1962) carried out some surveys concerned
with establishing the effect of air-conditioning on productivity at a leather factory in
Massachusetts, an electrical manufacturing company in Chicago and a manufacturing
company in Pennsylvania. In all cases after the installation of air-conditioning the
production increased by between 3 and 8.5 per cent during the summer months. On the
basis of these investigations Schweisheimer (1966) concluded that the average
performance of workers dropped by 10 per cent at an internal room temperature of
30°C, by 22 per cent at 32°C and by 38 per cent at 35°C.
Konz and Gupta (1969) investigated the effects of local cooling of the head on
mental performance in hot working environments. The subject had to create words in
ten minutes from one of two sets of eight letters, which were printed on a blank form.
Poor conditions without cooling resulted in the creation of words dropping by some
20 per cent, whereas with cooling the reduction was about 12 per cent.
Abdou and Lorsch (1994) studied the effects of indoor air quality on productivity.
It was concluded that productivity in the office environment is sensitive to those
conditions which lead to poor indoor air quality, and this is linked to sick building
syndrome. It is recognised that any stress is also influenced by management and other
factors in the workplace. Occupants with local control over their environment generally
have an improvement in their work effort, but in a more general way there is a synergistic
effect of a multitude of factors which affect the physical and mental performance of
people. Abdou and Lorsch (1994) concluded that in many case studies occupants
have been highly dissatisfied with their environment, even though
measurements have indicated that current standards were being met. This
highlights the need to review standards and the basis on which they are made. Exactly
the same conclusion is drawn by Donnini et al. (1994).
Productivity depends on four cardinal aspects: personal, social, organisational
and environmental (Fig. 1.1). Although it is difficult to collect hard data which would
give a precise relationship between the various individual environmental factors and
productivity, there is sufficient evidence to show that there are preferred environmental
settings that decrease people’s complaints and absenteeism, thus indirectly enhancing
productivity. The assessment of problems at the workplace using complaints is
unreliable, because there is little mention of issues that are working well, and also the
complaints may be attributable to entirely different factors. Abdou and Lorsch (1994)
contend that the productivity of 20 per cent of the office workforce in the USA could
be increased simply by improving the air quality of the office, and this would be worth
approximately $60 billion per year.
Work by Vernon et al. (1926, 1930) shows a clear relationship between absenteeism
and the average ventilation grading for a space, which was judged by the amount of
glazing on various walls; windows on three sides had the highest grading and windows
on one side had the lowest. Abdou
Figure 1.1 Factors which affect productivity

12 Clements-Croome
and Lorsch (1994) give the following causes as being the principal ones contributing to sick
building syndrome:
• building occupancy being higher than intended

• low efficiency of ventilation
• renovation using the wrong materials
• low level of facilities management
• condensation or water leakage
• low morale and lack of recognition.
In this case lower efficiency of ventilation means that the supply air is not reaching the space
where the occupants are, hence the nose is breathing in recirculated stale air. It is important
to realise that even if the design criteria are correct for ventilation, the complete design team
are responsible for ensuring that the systems can be easily maintained; the owner and the
facilities manager also need to ensure that maintenance is carried out effectively. The tenant
and occupants should use the building as intended. When new pollutant sources are introduced,
such as new materials or a higher occupancy density, then the ventilation will become
inadequate.
Burge et al. (1987) conducted a study of building sickness among 4,373 office workers in
42 UK office buildings having 47 different ventilation conditions. The data were further
analysed by Raw et al. (1990). The principal conclusions were that as individuals reported
more than two symptoms, the subjects reported a decrease in productivity; none of the best
buildings in this survey were air-conditioned and these had fewer than two symptoms per
worker on average, whereas the best air-conditioned buildings had between two and three
symptoms; women recorded more symptoms than men, but there was no overall difference
in productivity; individual control of the environment had a positive effect on productivity;
the productivity was increased by perceived air quality; productivity, however, increased
with perceived humidity only up to a certain point and then appeared to decrease again.
Evidence supporting the importance of individual control of environment is again provided
by Preller et al. (1990). It should be said that some contrary evidence exists concerning some
of these factors, which points to the need for a systems approach to studying the effects of
environment in buildings such as that proposed by Jones (1995).
Indoor environment is a dynamic interaction of spatial, social and physical factors, which
affects productivity, health and comfort. The indoor environment and consequently the
health of people can be affected by building materials and construction as well as the services
systems (Rudnai, 1994). A complete analysis of the indoor environmental quality should
take into consideration more than indoor air quality and thermal comfort. It should include
the quality of lighting, sound levels, layout of individual work spaces, colour schemes,
building materials, indoor CO2 concentrations, radiation and electromagnetic fields, dust
levels, and biological contaminants.
Productivity can be related to quality and satisfaction of the work performed. Studies
have shown (Clements-Croome et al., 1997; Lorsch and Abdou, 1994a, 1994b; Raw et al.,
1994; Woods, 1989; Wyon, 1982; Mackworth, 1946) that productivity at work bears a close
relationship to the work environment. Burge et al. (1987) demonstrate a strong relationship
between self-reports of productivity and ill-health symptoms related to buildings:
productivity decreases as ill-health symptoms increase. There is a slightly less marked trend
relating productivity and air quality, but it is a significant effect.
According to a Trade Union Congress survey of union health and safety for representatives
at more than 7,000 workplaces (Guardian, 7 October 1996), work-related stress has become
the most serious health hazard faced by British employees. The Financial Times (5/6 October
1996) stated that stress at work is costing British industries £79bn at a loss of 40 million
working days per year. The concept of the sick building reflects the users’ dissatisfaction,
which can be as high as 40–50 per cent (Brundrett, 1994). Consumers are increasingly
conscious of their rights to have a safe and pleasant environment and also believe that their
productivity is impaired in unhealthy conditions. Concerns for productivity have accelerated
as salaries have increased. In a typical commercial organisation salaries amount to about 90
per cent of the total costs, so even a seemingly small percentage increase in productivity of
0.1 to 2 per cent can have dramatic effects on the profitability of a company.
Dorgan (1994) defines productivity as the increased functional and organisational output
including quality. This increase can be the result of direct measurable decreases in absenteeism,
decreases in employees leaving work early, or reductions of extra long breaks and lunches.
The increase can also be the result of an increase in the quantity and quality of production
while employees were active; improved indoor air quality is an important consideration in
this respect. There is general agreement that improved working conditions – and the office
environment is certainly one of the more important working conditions – tend to increase
productivity. However, determining a quantitative relationship between environment and
productivity proves to be highly controversial. While some researchers claimed to have
reliably measured improvements of 10 per cent or more, others presented data showing that
no such relationships exist. Since the cost of the people in an office is an order of magnitude
higher than the cost of maintaining and operating the building, spending money on improving
the work environment may be the most cost-effective way to improve worker productivity
(Lorsch and Ossama, 1993).
In 1994, the energy use in an average commercial office building in the USA had an annual
cost of approximately $20 per m2, whereas the functional cost was approximately $3,000
per m2. Functional costs include the salaries of employees, the retail sales in a store, or the
equivalent production value of a hotel, hospital, or school. This means that a 1 per cent gain
14 Clements-Croome
in annual productivity ($30 per m2) has a larger economic benefit than a 100 per cent annual
reduction ($20 per m2) in energy use. In addition, the productivity gains will increase the
benefits such as repeat business in hotels, faster recovery times in hospitals, and attainment
of better jobs due to better education in schools. A small gain in worker productivity has
significant economic impacts, and it makes sense to invest in improving the indoor environment
to achieve productivity benefits. Dorgan (1994) states that productivity gains of at least 1.5
per cent in generally healthy buildings, and 6 per cent in sick buildings, can easily be
achieved. As costs of improvement in the indoor air are typically paid back over a period
ranging from less than nine months to two years, the benefits clearly offset the renewal cost,
resulting in a very favourable cost-to-benefit ratio. Some literature indicates that productivity
gains may be as high as 5 to 10 per cent. However, achieving such productivity gains may
require the use of advanced active or passive environmental control as well as personal
controls. Examples of productivity gains in the order of 1 to 3 per cent are found in several
studies (Kroner, 1992). Informal (unpublished) and anecdotal reports on productivity gains
have been researched in supermarkets, fast food outlets, retail department stores, schools,
and office buildings. Estimated gains in sales ranging from 4 to 15 per cent in retail stores
during summer months were reported by Dorgan (1994).
By focusing on the productivity benefits, projects which improve the indoor environment
are increasingly moved away from an energy-saving scenario to one emphasising
productivity increase. Even if a proposed project improves the indoor environment but
increases the energy cost by 5 per cent, the project may still be economically feasible if the
productivity increase is greater than 0.04 per cent. Wyon (1993) states that the ‘leverage’ of
environmental improvements on productivity is such that a 50 per cent increase in energy
costs of improved ventilation would be paid for by a gain of only 0.25–0.5 per cent in
productivity, and capital investments of $50 per m2 would be paid for by a gain of only 0.5
per cent in productivity. The payback time for improved ventilation is estimated to be as
low as 1.6 years on average, and to be well under one year for buildings in which the
ventilation is below currently recommended standards.
An increase in productivity can be achieved with either no increase in energy use (or even
a decrease), or with an increase in funding for the given level of technology. The use of energy
recovery systems, and the increased use of such technologies as advanced filtration,
dehumidification, thermal storage and natural energy, are examples of energy improving
technologies whose cost can be offset by increases in productivity. The increased building
services budget should allow for the introduction of the best system, not the cheapest. Any
indoor environment productivity management programme should be able to include reducing
energy consumption as one of the design objectives. Improving indoor environment will
provide a high return on investment through productivity gains, health saving and reduced
energy use. The benefits of improved indoor environment are improved productivity, increased
profits, greater employee–customer–visitor health and satisfaction, and reduced health costs.
The potential productivity benefits of improved indoor environment are so large that this
opportunity cannot be ignored. There are indirect, long-term, and social benefits.
References
Abdou, O.A. and Lorsch, H.G. (1994) The impact of the building indoor environment on
occupant productivity: Part 3: Effects of indoor air quality, ASHRAE Trans. 1, 100(2), 902–
913.
Bedford, T. (1949) Airconditioning and the health of the industrial worker, Journal of Institution
of Heating and Ventilating Engineers, 17, 112–146.
BOSTI (Buffalo Organisation for Social and Technological Innovation) (1982) The Impact of
the Office Environment on Productivity and the Quality of Working Life. Buffalo, NY:
Westinghouse Furniture Systems.
Brundrett, G. (1994) Health and the built environment, Renewable Energy, 5, II, 967–973.
Burge, S.A., Hedge, A., Wilson, S., Harris-Bas, J. and Robertson, A. (1987) Sick building syndrome:
a study of 4373 office workers, Ann. Occ. Hygiene, 31, 493–504.
Clements-Croome, D.J., Kaluarachchi, Y. and Li, B. (1997) What do we mean by productivity,
Workplace Comfort Forum, October, London.
Clements-Croome, D.J. and Roberts, M. (1981) Airconditioning and Ventilation of Buildings
(UK: Pergamon).
Collins, J.G. (1989) Health characteristics by occupation and industry: United States 1983–
1985. Vital Health and Statistics 10(170) Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health
Statistics.
Cyfracki, L. (1990) Could upscale ventilation benefit occupants and owners alike? Indoor Air
’90, 5th International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate, 5, 135–141. Aurora,
ON: Inglewood Printing Plus.
Dorgan, C.E. et al. (1994) Productivity link to the indoor environment estimated relative to
ASHRAE 62-1989, Proceedings of Healthy Buildings ’94, Budapest, 461–472.
Dowson, D. (1997) Personal communication, 27 August.
Drake, P. (1990) Summary of Findings from the Advanced Office Design Impact Assessments,
Report to Johnson Controls Inc., Milwaukee, WI.
Ellis, R. (1994) Tomorrow’s Workplace, a Survey for Richard Ellis by The Harris Research
Centre.
Holcomb, L.C. and Pedelty, J.F. (1994) Comparison of employee upper respiratary absenteeism
costs with costs associated with improved ventilation, ASHRAE Trans., 100(2), 914–920.
Jones, P. (1995) Health and comfort in offices, Arch. J. 8 June, 33–36.
Kamon, E. (1978), Physiological and behavioural responses to the stresses of desert climate, in
Urban Planning for Arid Zones, ed. G. Golany (New York: Wiley).
Klemm, W. et al. (1991) Topographical EEG Maps of Human Responses to Odours, Texas A &
M University, unpublished report.
Kobrick, D.J. and Fine, M.M. (1983) Climate and human performance, in The Physical
16 Clements-Croome
Environment at Work, eds Oborne and Gruneberg, 69–197 (New York: John Wiley and Sons).
Konz, S. and Gupta, V.K. (1969) Water-cooled hood affects creative productivity, ASHRAE J.
40–43.
Kroner, W.M. and Stark-Martin, J.A. (1992) Environmentally Responsive Work Stations and
Office Worker Productivity. Workshop on Environment and Productivity, June (contact
Department of Architecture, Rensselaer University, Troy, NY).
Lorig, T. and Roberts, M. (1990) Chem. Senses, 15, 537–545.
Lorsch, H.G. and Abdou, O.A. (1994a) The impact of the building indoor environment on
occupant productivity: Part I: Recent studies, measures and costs, ASHRAE Trans., 100(2),
741–749.
Lorsch, H.G. and Abdou, O.A. (1994b) The impact of the building indoor environment on
occupant productivity: Part II: Effects of temperature, ASHRAE Trans., 100(2), 895–901.
Lorsch, H.G. and Abdou, O.A. (1993) The impact of the building indoor environment on
occupant productivity, ASHRAE Trans., 99, Part 2.
Mackworth, N.H. (1946) Effects of heat on wireless operators hearing and recording morse code
messages, Br. J. Ind. Med., 3, 143–158.
Moray, N. et al. (1979) Final report of the Experimental Psychology Group. Mental Workload:
Its Theory and Measurement, ed. Moray, N., 101–114 (New York: Plenum).
NEMA (1989), Lighting and Human Performance: a Review, a report sponsored by the Lighting
Equipment Division of the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, Washington, DC,
and the Lighting Research Institute, New York.
Pepler, R.D. (1963) Temperature: Its Measurement and Control in Science and Industry, 3, ed.
Hardy, 319 (Rheinhold).
Pepler, R.D. and Warner, C.G. (1968) ASHRAE Trans., 74, Part II.
Preller, L., Zweeis, T., Brunekeef, B. and Boleij, J.S. (1990) Sick leave due to work related health
complaints among office workers in the Netherlands. Indoor Air ’90, 5th International
Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate, 227–230.
Raw, G.J., Roys, M.S. and Leaman, A. (1990) Further findings from the Office Environment
Survey: Productivity. Indoor Air ’90, 5th International Conference on Indoor Air Quality
and Climate, 1, 231–236.
Raw, G.J., Roys, M.S. and Leaman, A. (1994) Further Findings from the Office Environment
Survey, Part 1: Productivity, Building Research Establishment, Garston, Note N79/89.
Rosenfeld, S. (1989) Worker productivity: hidden HVAC cost, Heating/Piping/Air Conditioning,
September, 69–70.
Rudnai, P. (1994) Proceedings of Healthy Buildings 1994, Budapest, 1, 487–497.
Samimi, B.S. and Seltzer, J.M. (1992) Sick building syndrome due to insufficient and/ or nonuniform
fresh air supply in a multi-storey office building, IAQ ’92: Environments for People, 319–
322.
Schweisheimer, W. (1966) Erhaehung und Leistung und Produktion, Wärme, Luftungs und
Gesundheitstechnik, Nov., 278–285.
Torii, S. et al. (1988) Chapter in Perfumery: the Psychology and Biology of Fragrance, ed. van
Toller and Dodd (New York: Chapman Hall).
Vernon, H.M. (1936) Accidents and their Presentation (Cambridge University Press).
Vernon, H.M., Bedford, T. and Warner, C.G. (1926) A physiological study of the ventilation and
heating in certain factories, Rep. Ind. Fatigue Res. Bd, no. 58, London.
Vernon, H.M., Bedford, T. and Warner, C.G. (1930) A study of heating and ventilation in
schools, Rep. Ind. Health Res. Bd, no. 35, London.
Wilkins, A.J. (1993) Health and efficiency in lighting practice, Energy, 18(2), 123–129.
Woods, J.E., Drewry, G.M. and Morey, P. (1987) Office worker perceptions of indoor air quality
effects on discomfort and performance, 4th International Conference on Indoor Air and
Climate, Berlin, 464–468.
Woods, J.E. (1989) Cost avoidance and productivity in owning and operating buildings,
Occupational Medicine, State of the Art Reviews 4(4), eds J.E. Cone and M.J. Hodgson; also
Problem Buildings: Buildings Associated Illness and the Sick Building Syndrome, 753–770
(Philadelphia, PA: Hanley & Belfus).
Wyon, D.P. (1982) The effect of moderate thermal stress on the potential work performance
of factory worker, Energy and Buildings, April.
Wyon, D.P. (1993) The economic benefits of a healthy indoor environment, Healthy Air ’94,
Budapest, 405–416.
Chapter 2
Creativity in the workplace

Jackie Townsend
This is a book about well-being; the well-being of any building and of the people
working inside it and how the combination of the building and the occupants can be
enhanced to produce an environment which encourages creative, productive work and
pleasure: pleasure in the environment and pleasure in the work.
It occurs to me that this desire to create an environment which is conducive to
creative and productive work indicates quite a radical shift in the whole philosophy of
work and the workplace. I would suggest that work and the workplace, for the great
majority of people, have not been instigated, designed, begun and built with the workers
themselves in mind. Most office buildings are lumps of grey concrete with bits of glass
in, not particularly beautiful or inviting to any of the senses, but purely functional.
They speak of power and money rather than creativity and pleasure.
It is entirely possible to build buildings which enhance the environment and make
us feel good. Most cathedrals do this, especially the great ones such as St Paul’s and
Chartres. Because people visit them with a feeling of respect, religious or not, and
mostly treat them in a respectful way, this energy builds up so that the building
performs its function in a more and more fulfilling way. It gets better and better. Of
course, the Church speaks of a different kind of power: its own, which is also not
entirely altruistic or benevolent except sometimes on an individual level, and that of
the Other, the Divine, whatever you might perceive that to be. So it can be done and it
has been done.
Therapists who work with the body talk about function and form. Form implies the
function, and function guides the form. For instance, your two feet are not particularly
big but they can carry the weight of your whole body, without you falling over when
you stand still. They do this because the bone in your lower leg goes down into your
heel, so that it is the bones which are supporting your weight, but then you have
maybe around nine inches of progressively smaller bones with tendons, muscles and
Creativity in the workplace 19
skin, blood vessels and nerves, which spread out from your heel and then become five
toes. They are ideally designed for their purpose. Function and form.
There are basically three types of buildings. There are buildings built for worship,
buildings for living in and buildings for working in, although there might be some
overlap, for instance in hospitals, shops and leisure centres. I feel it is pertinent to ask,
with respect to creativity and creating a productive workplace, which of these are
designed and put together with the most respect for human life and human possibility
and endeavour.
At the conference on ‘Creating the Productive Workplace’ (London, 1997), Liam
Hudson spoke about boundaries, both physical and non-physical, as in, for example,
what is familiar and what is not, what is accepted, perhaps because it is part of our
conditioning, and what is not, yet. In suggesting these comparisons maybe I am myself
treading the boundary between the sacred and the profane, which the Japanese architect,
Shigeru Uchida, considers to be the original boundary of all boundaries, in the avenue
of thought I am offering here. Perhaps the relevance of any boundary, real or imagined,
is our willingness to push it to a different place or even remove it altogether, since
boundaries of any sort create a separation, and that usually takes the form of a separation
between people, a segregation, which causes pain. So, to consider the boundaries
between these three types of building, beginning with the boundary between the
sacred and the profane, if buildings built for worship go into the sacred box, by the
same criteria the buildings built for working in should go into the profane box, since by
the standards we usually set money and power are profanities. They are not of the
Divine. ‘Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the
things that are God’s.’ Buildings for living in could, I suppose, have a foot in both
camps, depending on the circumstances.
But maybe we could take a look at the intention that goes into the construction of
the three main types of buildings. So for buildings that are for living in, we think about
the things we do in our homes and the functions that they need to perform for us. We
sleep, eat, keep ourselves and our belongings clean, entertain ourselves, our families
and our guests and relax, and we are protected from the elements. So we have to allow
for all of that when building and buying homes, and of course the extent to which all
these functions are made more or less comfortable depends on the amount of money
we have available to spend on the structure and the fixtures and fittings. Buildings for
working in are usually very functional with a little bit of comfort. So there are lots of
workspaces, whether group or individual; some eating areas, rest areas and washing
and toilet facilities, all usually fairly basic, especially if they are used only by the
staff. Areas that are used by the public, any of whom may become clients or customers,
are usually more luxurious. This is not because the company cares about the comfort
20 Townsend
of the general public more than it cares about the comfort of its staff; it is part of its
public relations, the image that it is anxious to project about who it is and what it does.
Buildings for worship are different. The word ‘cathedral’ derives from the Latin
cathedra which itself comes from the Greek kathedra, meaning ‘a seat’. A cathedral is
a church in a diocese containing the bishop’s throne. They are built on sacred ground,
incorporating the ley lines, which are the meridians of the earth. Their function is to
give us a location to try to reach something larger or higher than our individual selves.
But a cathedral takes an average of eighty years to build. That’s quite a long time,
more time than any company would have available if, for instance, it wanted a new
headquarters, or to open a new branch.
Cathedrals also earn a lot of money for the Church and, when they were originally
built, for the local community, in times when wealth was invested in productive
assets, rather then bundles of paper made from trees which have to be cut down,
sitting in bank vaults and building societies and gambled in the money markets. Even
today, in Chartres, the bulk of the city’s businesses live from the tourists who visit the
cathedral 800 years after its completion. So sometimes the sacred and the profane can
be put in the same box. There is some affinity.
Apart from their physical design and construction, the difference between these
three types of buildings is the energy contained within them, which itself derives from
the intention behind them and the purpose for which they were built. Let’s take a look
at that. By ‘intention’ I mean the thought that created any building in the first place. A
community in which the Church is powerful says, ‘Let’s build a cathedral. It will give
people work to do; our craftsmen can do their best work there and employ apprentices
to continue their skills. People will come and bring us wealth, in one form or another,
which we can put into the cathedral to keep it beautiful or we can use in the community.’
(Recent studies have revealed that the quality of life for the common labourer in
Europe was the highest in the twelfth to thirteenth centuries, when most of the cathedrals
were built. It was possibly even higher than it is today.)
A modern housebuilder says, ‘I’m going to build some houses. People will buy
them to live in and that will earn me a living. I can build each house to my own
specifications, make sure the building regulations are covered, and cut corners wherever
possible. I’m not going to live in it so I will not bother to make it as good and as
pleasing as if I were. I will waste the space in the attic by leaving it unlit and without
electricity, gas and water connections. They can have tiny gardens because they are
going to be sitting in front of the television instead of growing vegetables.’ A look at
any modern housing estate bears out this assumption, cynical as it is. I live in a town
where there are lots of streets of Victorian houses; in fact I live in one myself. They are
mostly terraced and they do have tiny gardens (we do grow vegetables in ours) and
they were built for working people, but they are also spacious, elegant and very solid.
You can put large items of furniture in them and still have room to walk around. They
are gentle houses and you can’t help feeling that they have been designed, built and put
together with more care, more thought, more time, more creativity and more pleasure
than the houses on the modern estate.
Another builder, a bit higher up the financial scale, decides to build an office block.
If he gets his timing right and he has a ready buyer he can make quite a lot of money,
which goes either into another office block or into the bank and the money markets.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with that, but these buildings are less than they
could be. There is less room for more care, more thought, more time, more creativity
and more pleasure. They are not appropriate because they rarely fit with the intention.
These buildings, then, are less likely to become workplaces that are creative as well as
productive.
All of this is part of the purpose and is included in the intention, and it makes a
difference in the energy which is inherent in the building, whatever kind of building it
is, and the energy that we bring to it. A church is a place of permanence and stability,
even while the Church itself waxes and wanes, and even though some churches have
been converted into homes and even offices, because that is what it represents. People
visit cathedrals to appreciate the architecture but also to experience the peace and the
restorative energy that exudes from these buildings. It helps us to find a space in
ourselves, the same kind of space that is found in meditation, and which is not the
same as thinking. The body enjoys this space and there is a resonance in buildings
which have the kind of energy that allows this space to be found. I would suggest that
we try to find ways to incorporate these kinds of intentions into our modern buildings.
The energy will then come because it has been invited, so to speak. And this will
encourage creative endeavour.
The energy in and around any building comes from the intention that was there
before its construction, the structure itself (both the design and the actual building of
it), the feelings of the people who spend their time there (whether living, working or
praying), and the energy that other people bring to it. You can tell a house that has a
good atmosphere while you are still standing on the front doorstep; a cathedral is a
place of peace and harmony because that is what people bring to it; a large building
such as a block of offices or a university can give a feeling of pleasure if that intention
is part of it, and such buildings do exist and make very strong statements about
themselves and their owners because of the contrast they provide to all their neighbours.
One such building is the headquarters of the NMB Bank just outside Amsterdam (as
described in a corporate PR publication, NMB Bank’s Head Office). It is made up of
several medium-sized towers, all linked by walkways on the inside. The aim of the
bank in its design and construction was to achieve a better balance between the
organisational requirements of the bank and the needs of the staff as individuals as well
22 Townsend
as bankers. It was designed by Ton Alberts, an Amsterdam architect who is known as

working on a consciously human scale. It has sloping walls (to deflect the sound of
passing traffic upwards and create better acoustics; also the sun’s heat is used more
efficiently) and there are no 90° angles. It is very light and spacious, with wide
staircases going only short distances so that staff are encouraged to use the stairs
rather than the lifts, which are incorporated into the walls in such a way as to be easily
overlooked. It has four restaurants, each very different to the other three and each used
by all members of staff. The colours everywhere are light and soft, and every wall is
slightly different to the previous one. The architect says that the aim is to allow
people to go about their work in a relaxed manner. ‘They shouldn’t feel they’re working;
they should just have the idea that they’re “getting on with things”.’ It is very low on
energy consumption, using natural ventilation and cooling systems and uses daylight
to maximum advantage. The overall feeling is welcoming and refreshing and one of
lightness. When you first see it, it looks quite amazing and rather bizarre, but it makes
you smile and you keep on smiling as you enter because the feeling of it is pleasurable
and the people you see going about their business and ‘getting on with things’ are a
part of it. The building is not just to keep them warm and dry and meet their physical
needs while they sit at their desks and shuffle and exchange bits of paper – it is the
expression of a philosophy, and I feel that the Bank is to be commended for taking
such a progressive stance and literally putting its money where its mouth is.
If we want to have workplaces that, of themselves, allow and encourage the
possibility of creative and productive work, then we have to look at why that is not
happening already (if indeed that is the case). I would suggest that there are two things
going on here which are relevant to well-being in the workplace. It is generally agreed
that we are currently going through a time of enormous change. Most people do not
like change and resist it with all their might. Most people also have a tendency, when
faced with a problem, to want somebody else, or something else, to take responsibility
for it, and so absolve them of their responsibility, and of their opportunity to do
something about it. As a species we are creative. We are bundles of energy that is
creative. We have ourselves created, and are creating, this period of change that we are
experiencing. If there is a problem, then the problem is our resistance and our expectation
that things will stay the same while political, social and business structures, and all
their ramifications, reorganise themselves around us. Albert Einstein observed that
problems cannot be solved at the same level at which they were created. What we need
is a truly creative response to change, and to learn to be creative in a completely new
way; the buildings that we construct and work in can be part of that. But, there again,
it is no bad thing to be reminded that hugely creative endeavours have been accomplished
in a shed at the bottom of the garden. It really depends on how we choose to use the
energy that is at our disposal, that in fact is us.
The other thing that is going on is also due partly to a reluctance, as groups and as
individuals, to take responsibility and a tendency to go instead for the easy option of
letting other people tell us what to do. Millions of people go to work every day and are
told what to do. The natural urge to creative self-expression is minimised and the
result is negativity and resentment, or dependence on what is seen as a higher authority.
In this way we limit ourselves. We can also limit ourselves by taking too specific an
orientation. We live in a society based on economics and business is the dominant
institution. The orientation of business is making money, and the orientation of education
at this time is moulding people to fit into business and economics. The move towards
more intellectual knowledge and greater specialisation can mean that other kinds of
knowledge and experiential skills are neglected, to the detriment of all parts of our
society and our lives. We are rapidly establishing a knowledge society, as opposed to
a society of practical and experiential skills. It seems pertinent to ask a few questions
about knowledge and also to look at the role of creativity. On one level life is a process
of learning and it can come to us or we can seek it out. So we go to school and college
and evening classes and workshops to learn about things and find out about what is
going on in the world around us and what we can do to be a part of it. And I think it is
a good idea to pursue actively this acquisition of knowledge. It helps us to make a
contribution and to participate in society. But I think it is also important to realise
that this is only one kind of knowledge. Essentially it is passed-down knowledge.
Finding out from other people what other people know; from their experience, their
experiments and their collection of passed-down knowledge. There is also the knowledge
that we have from our own experience and experiments. So we each have a pool of
inherited or passed-down knowledge, mostly to do with the intellect because it is not
our own experience, and then we have our own experience and things we have tried
ourselves, which brings in emotion, so now we have knowledge on an intellectual level
and knowledge on an emotional level: about interacting with other people, experiencing
how other people respond to us and our ideas, experiencing relationships, children,
families, rejection and acceptance in many different circumstances, and learning how
to handle all of that. In this way we start to mature through our emotions and we gain
insight, and this can be classed as knowledge, and it is valuable and usable. Because of
the emphasis on intellectual or passed-down knowledge in the education system and
especially in the National Curriculum, emotional growth and maturity lag behind
intellectual growth, and I think it is probably true to say that most people never get
anywhere near emotional maturity, although they may have several letters after their
names to show how much intellectual knowledge they have amassed.
Then there is intuitive knowledge, which comes from within, and which is dismissed
only by those who don’t have it. I think it was Jung who said that the only real
knowledge comes from within. And this is also of value and can be learned, but it is a
24 Townsend
slow process and often a painful one, because it demands a great deal of emotional
growth and finding out about oneself. For this reason it is avoided by most people
most of the time.
And then there is instinct, part of the primitive brain. It is difficult to quantify
instinct because it’s so tied up with our emotions and our physicality. Small children
are probably happiest with their instincts, because they haven’t yet been educated out
of them. Michel Odent, one of the pioneers of water birth, believes that instinct is a
vital part of our being which has historically been much maligned and neglected but
which we need to resurrect and nurture if we are to learn to care for ourselves and our
planet in an enlightened way (Odent, 1990). It is also a resource for creativity, which,
I have found, is like an underground stream into which all the other streams which are
the parts of yourself feed; they all flow along together quite nicely, lying dormant and
maturing, and waiting, because all the best ideas have to await their time and place, or
be dismissed as irrelevant or cranky. Then creativity develops what might be likened
to hot springs, which bubble up to the surface, into consciousness, and then it can be
put to use.
The essence of creativity is that it brings into being something new. The intellectual
knowledge and the level of emotional maturity that you have attained are obviously
substantial parts of this creativity, but there needs also to be a freedom of expression
and the opportunity to use all resources.
My feeling is that what is required is a much deeper perception than saying that if
you put people in nice friendly buildings then they will do good work. For a while
they probably will, but I suspect the effect will wear off as the new environment
becomes the norm. Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs (in the 1940s) bears
this out. Once basic needs for physical and emotional survival and safety are met,
people are more likely to be motivated by psychological and emotional factors of a
higher order such as job satisfaction, relationships with others, self-esteem and fulfilment.
Professor Clements-Croome says that productivity is related to the morale of the
people working for the organisation. I think that says it all, really. I think work is
important. Whatever kind of work it is and whether it is paid or unpaid, we spend a lot
of time doing it and it is the largest avenue for self-expression that we have, and
whether you’re cleaning the public lavatories at Piccadilly Circus or running a
multinational company, that still applies.
However, it has been estimated that only 27 per cent of us enjoy what we do as
work. Many people experience work as a major source of anxiety, unhappiness,
insecurity, frustration and turmoil, which is not only a shame in human terms but a
huge waste of resources, talent and creativity. Real joy comes from creativity, or the
expression of one’s own creative energy, which emanates from deep within a person,
from the soul. Everyone has it and there are no exceptions. However, what the great
majority of us also have is huge amounts of habit, and habit kills creativity. We brush
our teeth in the same way; we clean the bath in the same way; we put our clothes on
in the same way – right sock then left sock, or possibly the other way round. It’s hard
to remember, and yet I presume you put something on your feet every day. Is it before
or after underwear? Does it matter? What matters is the lack of conscious awareness
because our responses to these kinds of tasks, or doings, are habitual. Habit is death to
creativity because it is mindless and unconscious. Constant conscious awareness is
hard work but it brings enormous rewards, one of which is access to your own creativity.
I believe that this creativity, or ability to be creative, is potentially immensely
satisfying and very relevant to the work area, especially if we want that to be creative
and productive.
So how can we tap into that? Apart from cleaning the bath in a different way and
remembering the order in which you dress yourself, how do you start to be creative
and what happens when you are?
The dictionary definition of creative is ‘having the ability to create, characterised
by originality of thought; having or showing imagination; designed to or tending to
stimulate the imagination’.
Creative energy is life energy. And life energy is on a level of feeling and emotion.
The life force is an energy of feeling and it directs through feelings and emotions. The
things that you have the most energy for are the things that you want to do. So life
energy and therefore creative energy come from desire, which itself is a feeling for
some kind of satisfaction. It moves us in a specific direction. If you watch a flower
opening towards the sun in the morning, that is the energy of desire, and through that,
the flower is able to go through its life cycle. There is a biological blueprint and desire
may simply be a part of that, but without the desire, nothing happens. If we had no
desire for a mate, no children would be born, and it is the same for the flower.
So, feeling is where your life energy is. Feeling is what the life force comes from.
Maybe feeling even is the life force. You do something because you want to. You buy
something because you want it. You talk to someone because you are attracted to
them. You travel abroad because you want to see and experience different countries
and cultures. This is the energy you use to access creativity, and you use it with
awareness.
As I understand it, we have two brains. One of these brains we have in common
with all mammals and it is called the sub-cortical nervous system or the primitive
brain. It is associated with the basic adaptive systems, that is to say, the hormonal and
immune systems. Emotions and instincts are linked to the activity of the primitive
brain. The other brain can be called the rational brain or the neocortex. It is a kind of
supercomputer able to collect, put together, associate and store information. The
neocortex has two hemispheres which are joined by the corpus callosum, and it seems
26 Townsend
that the right side of the neocortex is usually more directly in touch with the primitive
brain. The left hemisphere is mainly concerned with analytical, logical thinking, language
and mathematical work. The right is responsible for spatial relations, for arts, recognising
faces and patterns. Its information handling is diffuse, simultaneous, pulling together
many facets at once.
What we also have is a masculine and a feminine aspect of the psyche, which ties in
with the right and left sides of the neocortex. Masculine qualities are thinking,
knowledge, analysis, discipline, focus, determination, accomplishment and endeavour.
Feminine qualities are to do with Eros, the principle of relatedness, intuition, feeling,
emotion and instinct, myth, symbol and metaphor. If the female part of you has a
creative idea or concept, it is the male in you which takes it out into the world and
brings it into form. As an analogy, think of a couple who live together and love each
other very much. The role of the female is to nourish and nurture. She’s the one who
stays at home and looks after what you have and sees what you need. Speaking
metaphorically, she goes through the cupboards to see what is there and what needs to
be there. She does that by feeling and being aware and by investigating. The role of the
male is to protect, and to find ways to go out into the world and get what is needed. In
turn, she supports him in doing this.
The seeds from a man and a woman need to come together to create new life. In the
same way the inner male and female come together to create something new. The
Chinese might categorise them as yin and yang, which are the opposite ends of the
same whole, forced apart but always seeking to come together. So you have water and
fire, both necessary for life, and opposite but complementary; sun and moon, light and
shade, day and night, north and south, yes and no, and so on.
If you were given a project, for instance, you would ask the female ‘how do you feel
about this, do you have some ideas, can you relate it to any previous experience?’. She
would then set to work and her antennae would bring in information, ideas and concepts,
from within herself and from her environment; from the air, so to speak, where the
ideas are floating around. It is the role of the male to put all of this diffuse information
into a structure and make it concrete, and present it. To think of the words and put
them on paper, of the physical structure and construct it. They work together and
sometimes, when you are doing something, and you’re really feeling good about it and
the energy is flowing and everything is happening just as you want it to, and you feel
complete – just for a while you don’t need anything or anyone – then the two brains
are functioning as one, and if you have an awareness of that it brings a feeling of
satisfaction.
One of the things we can do with our lives is try to bring these two into balance and
harmony, but this is difficult when one is so much more favoured than the other. At the
moment our society and our education system and even our world view – the belief
system that most of us have inherited and carry around with us – favour almost
exclusively the functions of the left hemisphere.
Ever since Descartes said ‘I think, therefore I am’, logic, fact and analytical thought
have been pursued, to the detriment of the feminine which says ‘I feel, therefore I am’.
It is essential to realise that we are whole beings and we need to acknowledge and use
all the parts of ourselves in order to achieve our potential, and to access our creativity.
In order for people to be creative in the workplace, they have to have a certain
amount of autonomy; they have to have some freedom to express themselves in what
they do. This means being willing to take personal responsibility and it means being
given opportunities to solve problems, run projects, have ideas for new ways of doing
their tasks, in a creative way. This means dealing with change, learning to relish the
challenges that change brings, making choices that contribute to personal growth as
well as the growth of the company, and using logic and intuition (right and left brain).
In this way companies and the people in them can flourish and prosper, and this is
surely the objective. This also means the loss of some security, for companies and the
people they comprise.
I spent some time in the local office of a large insurance company. Most of the staff
were either in front of a PC all day or on the telephone. Management felt that they
were well catered for. They had vending machines for a constant supply of drinks, a
subsidised canteen, a coffee shop, and there were regular staff outings and social
events. But while they were in the building they were unable to give themselves a
break for relaxation. It took only a few seconds to go to the vending machine and back
to the desk. The lights were on all day regardless of the weather because large filing
cabinets were in front of the windows, blocking natural light. The food in the canteen
was over-cooked, over-salted and over-sugared, while the coffee shop was in the
basement – again with no natural light – with tables and chairs bolted to the floor,
plastic flowers on the tables, with coffee and tea from more vending machines and in
plastic cups. There was an attractive garden in an open square in the middle of the
building, but it wasn’t open for the staff except on hot summer days, to let some air
into the building. You had the feeling of being trapped. There were so many things that
company could have done, but the first and most important would be to ask its staff
what they wanted. In that way people could think about what they wanted in the way
of facilities for work and for refreshment, opening the way for innovation and change
happening from within rather than imposed from without.
There are companies that function in a creative and productive way. At one American
ice-cream company which has recently set up business in the UK, for instance, all
company workers regularly swap jobs, so that every person can do any task that
needs to be done and so, of course, no-one is indispensable. There is a large manufacturing
company in São Paulo, Brazil where there are no secretaries, receptionists or PAs so
28 Townsend
everyone, including top managers, types letters, stands over photocopiers, fetches
their own guests and makes their own coffee. Employees choose their own working
hours and set their own salaries. There is a waiting list of people wanting to join this
company, in any capacity, because it is understood that everyone has a contribution to
make and every opportunity is given to create an avenue for each person to do that. In
twelve years this company has multiplied itself six times, productivity has increased
by 700 per cent and profits by 500 per cent, in a country with high inflation and a
chaotic national economic policy.
A start can be made in very simple, small but fundamental ways. The potential in
terms of the growth of the individual and the company is, quite literally, unlimited,
because creative energy, expressed and channelled into activities that encourage freedom
of choice, participation and some degree of autonomy, gives personal satisfaction in a
way that nothing else does. It is unlimited because it flows, quite naturally, out of
every person into the environment around. It also generates a lot of energy, both
physical and emotional, and excitement. People start to enjoy themselves at work,
they have ideas and think of new ways of doing things and new things to do, they
communicate more honestly and openly and start to function on a higher level. They
have fun. Maybe this is where seeing with the heart can come in, as people feel less
threatened and have less need to compete and be the best. They are more expansive,
more kind and more loving.
Imagine a company staffed from top to bottom (or inside to outside) by individuals
whose creative energy is being directed into exercising their power of choice in the
opportunities they have been given, taking personal responsibility, participating at
every level and creating a kind of career dialogue, whether as a cook in the staff
restaurant or a sales executive, with the company they work for. A dynamic is being
created that is palpable, it is a pleasure to be there, and that is what makes it work.
Reference
Odent, M. (1990) Water and Sexuality, Harmondsworth: Arkana.

Chapter 3
Consciousness, well-being and

the senses
Practice powerfully affects performance for simple and complex tasks

(Pashler, 1998)
For an organisation to be successful and to meet the necessary targets, the performance
expressed by the productivity of its employees is of vital importance. In many
occupations people work closely with computers within an organisation which is
usually housed in a building. Today, technology allows people to work easily while
they are travelling, or at home, and this goes some way to improving productivity.
There are still, however, many people who have a regular workplace which demarcates
the volume of space for private work but is linked to other workplaces as well as to
social and public spaces. People produce less when they are tired; have personal
worries; suffer stress from dissatisfaction with the job or the organisation. The physical
environment can enhance one’s work, but an unsatisfactory environment can hinder
work output.
Concentration of the mind is vital for good work performance. Absolute alertness
and attention are essential if one is to concentrate. There is some personal discipline
involved in attaining and maintaining concentration, but again the environment can be
conducive to this by affecting one’s mood or frame of mind; however, it can also be
distracting and can contribute to a loss of concentration.
A number of personal factors which depend on the physical and mental health of an
individual, and a number of external factors which depend on the environment and
work-related systems, influence the level of productivity. Experimental work on comfort
often looks at responses of a group as a whole and this tends to mask individuals’
need for sympathetic surroundings to work and live in. People also need to have a fair
degree of personal control about various factors in their environment. They react to
30 Clements-Croome
the environment as a whole, not in discrete parts, unless a particular aspect is taxing
the sensory system.
Productivity can be measured in absolute or direct terms by measuring the speed
of working and the accuracy of outputs by designing very controlled experiments with
well-focused tests. Comparative measures use scales and questionnaires to assess the
individual opinions of people concerning their work and environment. Combined
measures can also be employed, using for example some physiological measure such as
brain rhythms to see whether variations in the patterns of the brain responses correlate
with the responses assessed by questionnaires.
The nature of consciousness
‘We do not understand how the mind works – not nearly as well as we understand
how the body works, and certainly not well enough to design utopia or to cure
unhappiness.’ (Pinker, 1997)
How do the neural processes occurring in our brains while we think and act in the
world relate to our subjective sensations? Crick and Koch (1997) believe that this is a
central mystery of human life. The fundamental question that needs to be understood
is the relationship between the mind and the brain. We are conscious or aware of events
central to our attention or concentration at any one time. Often there are peripheral
events which feature in only a fleeting way in our consciousness unless they manage to
distract us. The ability to focus the concentration or alertness for a particular event,
such as the work we are undertaking, is an important issue when discussing
productivity. For high productivity we need high and sustained levels of concentration
centred on the task being carried out. There are many short-term, medium-term and
long-term factors which can contribute towards lowering productivity and these include
low self-esteem, low morale, an inefficient work organisation, poor social atmosphere
or environmental aspects such as excessive heat or noise. Factors which lower
productivity, by distracting our attention and diluting concentration, include lethargy,
headaches and physical ailments. These factors all feature in surveys carried out on
building sickness syndrome.
Crick and Koch (1997) discuss visual consciousness in trying to reach an
understanding about how the brain interprets the visual world based on the information
perceived by the visual system. Past experience evolved through living, or from our
genes, features strongly in our responses to the environment around us. The stimuli
from the environment trigger this system and arouse our consciousness to various
levels of concentration. The human perceptual sensory systems process information
Consciousness, well-begin and the senses 31
from visual, sound, touch, smell and taste sensations. Our surroundings create a sensory
experience and hence must have some effect on the way we work. Conditions external
to the body can disturb these systems; internal disturbances due to drugs or alcohol,
for example, can also upset the response to the world around us.
Greenfield (1997) believes that consciousness is impossible to define. She goes on
to state that neuronal connectivity is a very important feature of the brain, which
means that it is the connections rather than the neurons themselves that are established
as a result of experience. It is the pattern of these experience-related connections that
largely distinguishes the individuality of a human being. The pattern of these connections
can change quite rapidly. It appears that the brain remains adaptable and sensitive to
experience throughout a person’s life. Consciousness changes as biorhythms and flows
of hormones alter through daily cycles. Greenfield (1997) concludes that a critical
factor could be the number of neurons that are gathered up at any one time, and it is
this which determines one’s consciousness.
The state of knowledge about environmental factors is uneven. It is probably fair to
say that there is a high level of knowledge about how heat, light and sound affect our
thermal, visual or auditory responses. There is much less information about how we
react to combinations of these stimuli and also about how electromagnetism,
geomagnetism and chemical fields affect the sensory system. An added complication is
that human responses are partly physiological and partly psychological. This makes
the measurement of responses difficult because objective measures of lighting or
temperature levels are comparatively easy, but assessing people’s judgements about
preferred or acceptable levels of light and heat is much more difficult. Yet another
complication is that reception of information from visual images, music or speech,
smells or touch interact with one another. The sense organs extend beyond the eyes,
ears, nose, mouth and skin and include the vestibular organs concerned with orientation,
posture and locomotion, as well as a variety of respiratory and thermo receptors
which respond to air quality, pressure and temperature.
Our response to the world around us occurs at various levels. For example, a
cartoon can depict recognisable people from the skimpiest of outlines. The outline
form and a few added clues about detail are all that is required to recognise the person
being represented. Contrast this with a portrait by Rembrandt, for example, in which
colour, texture and shading give much more detailed information which triggers higher
orders of aesthetic and emotional response. Likewise, the quality of the environment
has a basic structure upon which is superimposed more detail. For example, air
movement can be represented at a basic level by a mean velocity, but a more complete
picture would refer to the degree of turbulence, the peak as well as the mean velocity,
and the periodicity of the air-flow. Crick and Koch (1997) describe various levels of
32 Clements-Croome
representations that occur in the visual field. They suggest that there may be a very
transient form or fleeting awareness that represents simple features and does not
require an attention–awareness mechanism. The renowned psychologist William James
believed that consciousness was not a thing but was processed thought, which
involved attention and short-term memory. From brief awareness the brain constructs
a view-centred representation and the visual inputs awaken a greater level of attention.
Crick and Koch go on to suggest that this in turn probably leads to a three-dimensional
object representation and thence to more cognitive ones.
In the design of the productive workplace an attempt is being made to set conditions
which allow selected information to be perceived and transmitted quickly through the
human perceptual sensory system. This pathway must not be trammelled by extraneous
information from peripheral stimuli. Efficient work processes and organisation, and
controllable environmental conditions can help this process given that the person is
healthy in mind and body and there is no interference at a social level from any other
person.
Chalmers (1996) asks the following questions about consciousness.
• How can a human subject discriminate sensory stimuli and react to them
appropriately?
• How does the brain integrate information from many different sources and use
this information to control behaviour?
• How is it that subjects can verbalise their internal states?
• How do physical processes in the brain give rise to subjective experience?
Crick and Koch (1997) suggest that meaning is derived from the linkages among the
various representations of the neuron firing fields which are spread through the cortical
system in a vast network, equivalent to a huge database which is changing as the
experience of the individual increases throughout life. Changes bring about the process
of learning. However, many questions remain unanswered. The existence of
consciousness does not seem to be derivable from physical laws, and because
consciousness is strongly subjective, there is no direct way to monitor it, although
questionnaires and semi-structured interviews are techniques which are employed.
Chalmers (1996) goes on to say that it is possible to use people’s descriptions of their
own experiences. There have been several surveys of productivity using self-assessment
techniques. This is a valid procedure as long as the subject attempts to structure the
information output in an objective fashion.
Recent work at Rochester University in New York suggests that the mind can affect
the immune system. Stress can decrease the body’s defences and increase the likelihood
of illness, resulting in a lowering of well-being. Stresses come from a variety of sources:

the organisation, the job, the person and the environment. It is likely that building
sickness syndrome is triggered by unfavourable combinations of environmental
conditions which stress the mind and body and lower the immune system, leaving the
body more sensitive to environmental conditions. The biological chain seems to be
that stress acts on mind and brain, to which the hypothalamus reacts and the hormone
ACTH is released, and then the hormone cortisol in the blood increases to a damaging
level. This chain of events interferes with human performance and consequently
productivity is lowered.
Architecture and the senses
Buildings should be a multi-sensory experience. This section is strongly influenced by

the book entitled The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses by Juhani Pallasmaa
(1996), who elegantly describes this belief in great detail. All students of building
design, whether architects or engineers, should read this book.
During the Renaissance the five senses were understood to form a hierarchical
system from the highest sense of vision down to touch. This reflects the image of the
cosmos in which vision is correlated with fire and light, hearing with air, smell with
vapour, taste with water and touch with earth. It is by vision and hearing that we
acquire most of our information from the world around us. But one should not
underestimate the importance of the other senses, such as the olfactory enjoyment of
a meal or the fragrance of flowers, and responses to temperature, which all provide a
bank of sensory experience that helps to mould our attitudes and expectancies about
the environment. The senses not only mediate information for the judgement of the
intellect; they are also channels which ignite the imagination. This aspect of thought
and experience through the senses, which trigger the body and mind, is stimulated by
the environment and people around us but, when we are inside a building, it is the
architecture of the space which sculpts the outline of our reactions. Merleau-Ponty
said that the task of architecture was to make visible how the world touches us.
In Buddhism there are nine levels of consciousness (Allwright 1998):
• the five senses felt by the eyes, ears, nose, mouth and skin
• the integration of senses using reason and logic
• rational thought expressed via self-awareness and intuition
• the stores of experience in the short- and long-term memories
• pure consciousness within the inner self; this also involves emotion.
34 Clements-Croome
At the heart of architecture is the fundamental question of how buildings in their

design and use can confront the questions of human existence in space and time and
thus express and relate to humans being in the world. If this question is ignored the
result is soulless architecture which is a disservice to humanity. There is a danger, for
example, that the ever-increasing pace of technology is distorting natural sociological
change and this makes it difficult for modern architecture to be coherent in human
terms.
Buildings must relate to the language and wisdom of the body. If they do not they
become isolated in the cool and distant realm of vision. For example, people passing
by a building gain a visual impression which they like, dislike or have no particular
feeling about. Buildings are a vital part of a nation’s heritage and so they are historically
important. This is in stark contrast to the sculptor, whose work can be selected and
located according to individual choice. But in assessing the value of building, how
much attention is paid to the quality of the environment inside the building and its
effects on the occupants? The qualities of the environment affect human performance
inside a building and these should always be given a high priority. This can be considered
as an invisible aesthetic, which together with the visual impact makes up a total
aesthetic.
Multi-sensory experience
Buildings should provide a multi-sensory experience for people and uplift the spirit. A
walk through a forest is invigorating and healing due to the interaction of all sense
modalities; this has been referred to as the polyphony of the senses. One’s sense of
reality is strengthened and articulated by the interaction of the senses. Architecture is
an extension of nature into the manmade realm and provides the ground for perception,
and the horizon to experience from which one can learn to understand the world.
Buildings filter the passage of light, air and sound between the inside and outdoor
environments; they also mark out the passage of time by the views and shadows they
offer to the occupants. Pallasmaa (1996) gives an example to illustrate this point. He
believes that the Council Chamber in Alvar Aalto’s Säynätsalo Town Hall recreates a
mystical and mythological sense of community where darkness strengthens the power
of the spoken word. This demonstrates the very subtle interplay between the senses
and how environmental design can heighten the expression of human needs within a
particular context.
Although the five basic senses are often studied as individual systems covering
visual, auditory, taste, smell, orientation and the haptic sensations, there is an interplay
between the senses. For example, eyes want to collaborate with the other senses. All
the senses can be regarded as extensions of the sense of touch, because the senses as a
whole define the interface between the skin and the world. The combination of sight
and touch allows the person to get a scale of space, distance or solidity.
Qualitative attributes in building design are often only considered at a superficial
level. For example, in the case of light the level of illuminance, the glare index and the
daylight factor are normally taken into account. But in great spaces of architecture
there is a constant deep breathing of shadow and light; shadow inhales, whereas
illumination exhales light. The light in Le Corbusier’s Chapel at Ronchamps, for example,
gives the atmosphere of sanctity and peace. How should we consider hue, saturation
and chroma in lighting design, for example?
Buildings provide contrast between interiors and exteriors. The link between them
is provided by windows. The need for windows is complex but it includes the need for
an interesting view, contact with the outside world and, at a fundamental level, it
provides contrast for people carrying out work in buildings. Much work today is done
by sitting at computers at close quarters and requires eye muscles to be constrained to
provide the appropriate focal length of vision, whereas when one looks outside towards
the horizon the eyes are focused on infinity and the muscles are relaxed. There are all
kinds of other subtleties, such as the need to recreate the wavelength profile of natural
light in artificial light sources, which need to be taken into account. Light affects mood.
How can this be taken into account in design?
The surfaces of the building set the boundaries for sound. The shape of the interior
spaces and the texture of surfaces determine the pattern of sound rays throughout the
space. Every building has its characteristic sound of intimacy or monumentality,
invitation or rejection, hospitality or hostility. A space is conceived and appreciated
through its echo as much as through its visual shape, but the acoustic concept usually
remains an unconscious background experience. At midnight on 31 December 1999, it
is intended that the sound of church bells will ring and echo throughout the land. The
sound will be a powerful uniting experience for the nation. It will make us aware of our
citizenship and awaken any patriotic feelings that we have within us. Recall what you
feel when hearing an organ in a cathedral, or the burst of applause at the end of a
concert, or the cries of seagulls in a harbour.
It is said that buildings are composed as the architecture of space, whereas music
represents the architecture of time. The sense of sound combines the threads of this
notion. Without people and machines, buildings are silent. Buildings can provide
sanctuary or peace and isolate people from a noisy, fast-moving world. The ever-
increasing speed of change can temporarily be reduced by the atmosphere created in a
building. The opposite is true when working with computers or watching television,
for example. Architecture emancipates us from the embrace of the present and allows
36 Clements-Croome
us to experience the slow healing flow of time. Again, buildings provide the contrast
between the passing of history and the time-scales of life today.
The most persistent memory of any space is often its odour. ‘Walking through the
gardens of memory, I discover that my recollections are associated with the senses’,
wrote the Chilean writer Isabel Allende (The Times, April 1998). Every building has its
individual scent. Our sense of smell is acutely sensitive. Strong emotional and past
experiences are awakened by the olfactory sense. Again think of the varying olfactory
experiences such as in a leather shop, a cheese stall, an Indian restaurant, a cosmetic
department or a flower shop; all awaken our memories and give, or do not give,
pleasure. Wine and whisky connoisseurs know that flavour is best sensed using the
nose, whereas texture is sensed in the mouth. Odours can influence cognitive processes
which affect creative task performance as well as personal memories. These tasks are
influenced by moods, and odours can affect these also (Warren and Warrenburg, 1993;
Erlichman and Bastone, 1991; Baron, 1990).
Various parts of the human body are particularly sensitive to touch. The hands are
not normally clothed and act as our touch sensors. But the skin of the body reads the
texture, weight, density and temperature of our surroundings. Proust gives a poetic
description of a space of intimate warmth next to a fireplace sensed by the skin: ‘it is
like an immaterial alcove, a warm cave carved into the room itself, a zone of hot
weather with floating boundaries’.
There is a subtle transference between tactile, taste and temperature experiences.
Vision can be transferred to taste or temperature senses; certain odours, for example,
may evoke oral or temperature sensations. The remarkable world-famous percussionist
Evelyn Glennie is deaf but senses sound through her hands and feet and other parts of
her body. Marble evokes a cool and fresh sensation. Architectural experience brings
the world into a most intimate contact with the body.
The body knows and remembers. The essential knowledge and skill of the ancient
hunter, fisherman and farmer, for example, can be learnt at a particular time but, more
importantly, the embodied traditions of these trades have been stored in the muscular
and tactile senses. Architecture has to respond to ways of behaviour that have been
passed down by the genes. Sensations of comfort, protection and home are rooted in
the primordial experiences of countless generations. The word ‘habit’ is too casual and
passes over the sequels of history embedded within us. Isabel Allende describes the
idea for her book Aphrodite (1998) as being ‘a mapless journey through the regions of
sensual memory’.
From early times the fire has been a symbol of human multi-sensory experience.
The fire gave light in darkness; it produced warmth for the body and heat for cooking;
it was a protection from hungry animals of prey; it was a social focus. A campfire
today, as throughout history, enhances our well-being and uplifts the spirits.
Well-being and productivity
Myers and Diener (1997) have been carrying out systematic studies about awareness
and satisfaction with life among populations. Psychologists often refer to this as
subjective well-being. Findings from these studies indicate broadly that those that
report well-being have happy social and family relationships; are less self-focused;
less hostile and abusive; and less susceptible to disease. It appears also that happy
people typically feel a satisfactory degree of personal control over their lives, whether
in the workplace or at home. It is probably fair to assume that it is more likely that the
work output of a person will be high if their well-being is high. Jamison (1997) reviews
research which links manic-depressive illness and creativity. Many artists such as the
poets Blake, Byron and Tennyson, the painter Van Gogh and the composer Robert
Schumann are well-known examples of manic-depressives. The work output of such
people is distinguished but lacks continuity. Mozart and Schubert were not classified
as manic-depressives and their work output was consistently high throughout their
short lifespans. In contrast, Robert Schumann was very prolific during 1839–41 and
1845–53, whilst suffering hypomania throughout 1840 and 1849. Between these time-
spans he had suffered from severe depression, and before 1838 and after 1853 made
suicide attempts.
In the workplace one is not expecting creativity at this level of genius; rather, it is
hoped that there will be a consistently high standard of work performance. It is
interesting to consider some case studies of the competitors at the Mind Sports
Olympiad held in London during August 1997 (Henderson, 1997). One competitor
could memorise a pack of 52 cards in just over 30 seconds. His daily routine involves
running four miles a day; no alcohol for six weeks before a tournament, during which he
eats a lot of pasta and other high-carbohydrate food to keep the blood sugar level high;
he also takes regular doses of a Chinese herb called Ginkgo biloba to improve blood
circulation; he practises the trance-like state which is needed to perform his memory
feats and has regular brain scans. This competitor believes in lowering his brain activity
to the optimum concentration level for this type of feat. This means that his brain
activity rate is reduced to 5–7 Hz, which allows a higher degree of meditative-type
concentration than the normal brain activity of 12–14 Hz. Another competitor stated
that he had a meat-free diet and a fitness programme, ran marathons and played tennis
matches and dived to improve concentration. Diving is about poise and balance, and
requires the same sort of mental rigour that is needed for competition draughts.
Tony Buzan is one of the organisers of the Olympiad, and believes that mind
training techniques can open up a new sphere of mental fitness, which needs to be
integrated with a physical fitness programme. The brain uses 40 per cent of the body’s
oxygen, and a healthy body promotes brain activity. Buzan goes on to say that the
38 Clements-Croome
imagination can do for the mind what weight training can do for the body. Everyone
can do concentration exercises almost anywhere by, for example, watching a vase of
flowers and concentrating on every detail, then closing his or her eyes and imagining it.
Well-being reflects one’s feelings about oneself in relation to one’s world. Warr
(1998) proposes a view of well-being which comprises three scales: pleasure to
displeasure; comfort to anxiety; enthusiasm to depression. There are job and outside-
work attributes which characterise one’s state of well-being at any point in time and
these can overlap with one another. Well-being is only one aspect of mental health;
other factors include personal feelings about one’s competence, aspirations and degree
of personal control.
People do not have to be Olympiad competitors to get more out of their work.
Townsend (1997) states that 25 per cent of us enjoy our work but the rest of us do not.
Productivity suffers as a consequence, due to the workplace being more a place of
conflict and dissatisfaction. Lack of productivity shows up in many ways, such as
absenteeism, arriving late and leaving early, over-long lunch breaks, careless mistakes,
overwork, boredom, frustration with the management and the environment. In the
same way as the Olympiad competitors aim to focus their mind completely on the
task in hand, Townsend (1997) believes we can all try to do this and, when we succeed,
the whole body feels different.
Townsend (1997) goes on to say that people in the workplace can be encouraged to
use both halves of their brain. The left-hand part is concerned with logic, whereas the
right-hand side is concerned with feeling, intuition and imagination (Ornstein, 1973).
If logic and imagination work together, problem-solving becomes more enjoyable and
more creative. Of course some people thrive on change while others prefer to do
repetitive types of work. There seems to be no doubt that the industrial and commercial
worlds can play a leading role in increasing the awareness of their workforce of all of
these possibilities. It is also important to start this way of thinking in school children.
References
Allwright, P. (1998) Basics of Buddhism. UK: Taplow Press.

Baron, R. (1990) Environmentally Induced Positive Effect; Its Impact on Self- efficacy,
Task Performance, Negotiation and Conflict, J. Appl. Soc. Psychol., 16, 16–28.
Chalmers, D.J. (1996) The Conscious Mind; In Search of a Fundamental Theory. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Crick, F. and Koch, C. (1997) The problem of consciousness, Scientific American, Special
Issue ‘Mysteries of the Mind’, Jan. 19–26.
Erlichman, H. and Bastone, L. (1991) Odour Experience as an Affective State, Report to
the Fragrance Research Fund, New York.
Greenfield, S. (1997) How might the Brain Generate Consciousness? Communication

Cognition, 30, 3–4, 285–300.
Henderson, M. (1997) Mental athletes tone their bodies to keep their minds in shape, The
Times, 19 August, 6.
Jamison, K.R. (1997) Manic Depressive Illness and Creativity, Scientific American, Special
Issue, ‘Mysteries of the Mind’, Jan., 44–49.
Myers, D.G. and Diener, E. (1997) The Pursuit of Happiness, Scientific American, Special
Issue, ‘Mysteries of the Mind’, Jan., 40–49.
Ornstein, R.E. (1973) The Nature of Consciousness. London: Viking.
Pallasmaa, J. (1996) The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses. London: Academy
Editions.
Pashler, H.E. (1998) The Psychology of Attention. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Pinker, S. (1997) How the Mind Works. London: Allen Lane.
Townsend, J. (1997), How to draw out all the talents, The Independent, tabloid section,
24 July, 17.
Warr, P. (1998) What is our Current Understanding of the Relationships between Well-
Being and Work?, Economics and Social Sciences Research Council Seminar Series at
Department of Organisational Psychology, Birkbeck College, London (ed. R. Briner),
22 Sept. and Journal Occ. Psychol. (1990) 63, 193–210.
Warren, C. and Warrenburg, S. (1993) Mood benefits of fragrance, Perfumer and Flavourist,
18, Mar./Apr., 9–16.
Chapter 4
Pleasure and joy, and their role

in human life
Michel Cabanac
Experiments on human subjects showed that the perception of sensory pleasure can serve
as a common currency to allow the trade-off among various motivations for access to
behaviour. The trade-offs between various motivations would thus be accomplished by
simple maximisation of pleasure. A common currency for motivations as different from one
another as physiological, ludic, social, aesthetic, moral, and religious is necessary to permit
competition for access to behaviour. Therefore, all motivations can be compared to one
another from the amount of pleasure and displeasure they arouse. It follows that the main
properties of sensory pleasure should belong also to joy. Indeed, joy and sensory pleasure
share identical properties; they are contingent, transient, and they index useful behaviours.
The behavioural final common path
One basic postulate of ethology is that behaviour tends to satisfy the most urgent need of
the behaving subject (Tinbergen, 1950; Baerends, 1956). One shortcoming of the theories
of the optimisation of behaviour proposed by ethologists and behavioural ecologists is
that the mechanism by which behaviour is optimised is never mentioned. In other words,
they do not explain how the subject ‘decides’. The notion of behavioural final common
path is a first step on the way leading to an answer to that question. Paraphrasing Sherrington’s
image of the motoneuron final common path of all motor responses, McFarland and Sibly
(1975) pointed out that behaviour is also a final common path on which all motivations
converge. This image incorporates all motivations into a unique category since behaviour
must satisfy not only physiological needs but also social, moral, aesthetic, playful
motivations. Indeed, it is often the case that behaviours are mutually exclusive; one cannot
work and sleep at the same time. Therefore, the brain, responsible for the behavioural
response, must rank priorities and determine trade-offs in the decisions concerned with
allocating time among competing behaviours. The brain can be expected to operate this
Role of pleasure and joy in human life 41
ranking by using a common currency (McFarland and Sibly, 1975; McNamara and
Houston, 1986). In the following pages pleasure and joy will be proposed as this common
currency.
Sensory pleasure
Sensory pleasure possesses several characteristics: pleasure is contingent, pleasure is the

sign of a useful stimulus, pleasure is transient, pleasure motivates behaviour. In the commerce
of a subject with stimuli, it has been shown experimentally that the wisdom of the body
leads the organism to seek pleasure and avoid displeasure, and thus achieve behaviours
which are beneficial to the subject’s physiology (Cabanac, 1971). Relations exist between
pleasure and usefulness and between displeasure and harm or danger. For example, when
subjects are invited to report verbally, the pleasure aroused by a skin thermal stimulus can
be predicted knowing deep body temperature (Cabanac et al., 1972; Attia, 1984) (Fig. 4.1).
A hypothermic subject will report pleasure when stimulated with moderate heat, and
displeasure with cold. The opposite takes place in a hyperthermic subject. Pleasure is
actually observable only in transient states, when the stimulus helps the subject to return
to normothermia. As soon as the subject returns to normothermia, all stimuli lose their
strong pleasure component and tend to become indifferent. Sensory pleasure and displeasure
thus appear especially suited to being a guide for thermoregulatory behaviour (Fig. 4.2).
The case of pleasure aroused by eating shows an identical pattern (Fig. 4.3). A given
alimentary flavour is described as pleasant during hunger and becomes unpleasant or
Figure 4.1 Pleasure (positive ratings) and displeasure (negative ratings) reported by a
subject in response to thermal stimuli presented for 30 s on the left hand
Source: Cabanac (1986).
42 Cabanac
Figure 4.2 Direct calorimetry of the heat loss by a hypothermic subject’s hand when dipped
into highly pleasant cold water at 20°C: the plateau around min 12 is a steady
state, after initial deflection, when heat flow taken from the hand by the cold
water is equal to heat flow brought to the hand by arterial blood (Tes, oesophageal
temperature). Knowing the flow of water running round the hand, it is easy to
calculate that the heat lost by the hand corresponds to ~73 W
Source: Cabanac et al. (1972).
indifferent during satiety. Measurement of human ingestive behaviour confirms the above
relationship of behaviour with pleasure; it has been repeatedly demonstrated in the case of
food intake (Fantino, 1984, 1995), that human subjects tend to consume foods that they
report to be pleasant and to avoid foods that they report to be unpleasant. Pleasure also
shows a quantitative influence: the amount of pleasurable food eaten is a function of alimentary
restrictions and increases after dieting. The result is that pleasure scales can be used to judge
the acceptability of food.
Thus, in the cases of temperature and taste, the affective dimension of sensation depends
directly on the biological usefulness of the stimulus to the subject. This was already noticed
by Aristotle (quoted by Pfaffmann, 1960). The word ‘alliesthesia’ was coined to describe the
fact that the affective dimension of sensation is contingent, and to underline the importance
of this contingency in relation to behaviour (Cabanac, 1971): a given stimulus will arouse
either pleasure or displeasure according to the internal state of the stimulated subject. The
seeking of pleasure and the avoidance of displeasure lead to behaviours with useful homeostatic
consequences. Garcia et al. (1985) have shown how past history, such as illness induced in
Figure 4.3 Pleasure (positive ratings) and displeasure (negative ratings) reported by a
fasted subject in response to the same gustatory stimulus, a sample of sweet
water presented repeatedly every third minute. Solid symbols, the subject
expectorated the samples after tasting; open symbols, the subject swallowed
the samples and thus accumulated a heavy sucrose load in his stomach. It can
be seen that the same sweet taste that first aroused pleasure in the subject
aroused displeasure once the subject was satiated
association with the taste of an ingested substance, can ‘stamp in’ a change in the affective
quality of that taste. The behaviour of subjects instructed to seek their most pleasurable skin
temperature could be described and predicted from their body temperatures, and the equations
describing their behaviour were practically the same as those describing autonomic responses
such as shivering and sweating (Cabanac et al., 1972; Bleichert et al., 1973; Marks and
Gonzalez, 1974; Attia and Engel, 1981).
It is possible therefore from verbal reports to dissociate pleasure from behaviour and to
show thus that the seeking of sensory pleasure and the avoidance of sensory displeasure lead
to behaviours with beneficial homeostatic consequences. Pleasure thus indicates a useful
stimulus and simultaneously motivates the subject to approach the stimulus. Pleasure serves
both to reward behaviour and to provide the motivation for eliciting behaviour that optimises
physiological processes. One great advantage of this mechanism is that it does not take
rationality or a high level of cognition to produce a behaviour adapted to biological goals.
(‘Rational’ is understood, here, in its philosophical acceptation (i.e. reason), and not in its
narrower economical sense.) Indeed, conditioned food aversion can be induced during sleep
and under anaesthesia (Garcia, 1990). As soon as a stimulus is discriminated, the affective
44 Cabanac
dimension of the sensation aroused tells the subject, animal or human, that the stimulus
should be sought or avoided.
Pleasure and comfort
Let us keep the examples taken from temperature to understand the difference between
comfort and pleasure. Comfort is a general feeling, whereas sensory pleasure applies to the
sensation aroused by a precise stimulus. Thermal comfort used to be defined as the ‘subjective
satisfaction with the thermal environment’ (Bligh and Johnson, 1975). However, Fig. 4.4
shows that this definition is inadequate. This figure simplifies the experimental results
presented in Fig. 4.1. It can be seen that the cases of ‘subjective satisfaction with the thermal
environment’, boxes P and I, represent a heterogeneous category including pleasure and
indifference. Pleasure, P boxes, occurs when there is an internal trouble, hypothermia or
hyperthermia. In these cases a pleasant stimulus, e.g. warm skin in a hypothermic subject,
tends to correct the trouble, i.e. results in normothermia, and then turns unpleasant, i.e. to
follow up with our example, warm skin in a normothermic subject. Pleasure provides
‘subjective satisfaction with the thermal environment’, but the situation is highly unstable.
This led to the new definition of thermal comfort as ‘subjective indifference to the thermal
environment’ (IUPS Commission for Thermal Biology, 1987). Defined this way, comfort is
stable and can last and is clearly different from pleasure whose characteristic is to be
transient.
Figure 4.4 Fig. 4.1 data simplified to a 3 × 3 matrix: the affective dimension of thermal
sensation depends on the subject’s internal state. A thermal stimulus feels
unpleasant (U), indifferent (I) or pleasant (P) depending on body core temperature.
Pleasure occurs only in dynamic situations when a stimulus tends to correct an
internal trouble

A feeling of comfort indicates therefore that everything is right, but this is not a very
exciting feeling, whereas pleasure indicates, in a troubled situation, a useful stimulus that
should be consumed but will not last once the trouble is corrected.
Conflicts of motivations
If pleasure indicates usefulness, it would be of interest to explore situations with simultaneous

and possibly conflicting multiple motivations. Several experiments were conducted where
one motivation was pitted against another (e.g. sweet v. sour, temperature v. fatigue, chest v.
legs). In all these experiments the subjects’ behaviours were repeatedly coherent. In the
bidimensional sensory situations imposed by the experimenters the subjects described maps
of bidimensional pleasure in sessions where their pleasure was explored. They tended to
move to the areas of maximal pleasure in these maps, in sessions where their behaviour was
explored.
Thus, subjects in conflict situations tend to maximise their sensory pleasure as perceived
simultaneously in both dimensions explored. In these experiments the subjects tended to
maximise the algebraic sum of their sensory pleasure, or to minimise their displeasure. As a
corollary of this observation, it can be stated that, in a situation of conflict of motivations,
one can predict the future choice of the subject from the algebraic sum of affective ratings of
pleasure and displeasure given by the subject to the conflicting motivations. This theoretical
situation is presented in Fig. 4.5.
Such a prediction is not surprising if one considers that, at each instant, all motivations
are ranked to satisfy only the most urgent and that there must exist a common currency to
actuate the behavioural final common path (McFarland and Sibly, 1975; McNamara and
Houston, 1986; Cabanac, 1992). The results of the above experiments show that sensory
pleasure fulfilled the conditions required of a common motivational currency, at least in the
case of the behaviours selected which have clear physiological implications.
From pleasure and comfort to joy and happiness
Let us now see another implication of the behavioural final common path and the common
currency. In everyday life, physiological motivations must compete with other motivations:
social, ludic, religious, etc. Since pleasure was the common currency allowing trade-offs
among various physiological motivations, the same currency must also allow comparison of
all motivations in order to rank them by order of urgency. In turn, the transience of pleasure
can be found also in other aspects of consciousness than sensation. Happiness is considered
generally as the aim of life. Yet, the pursuit of happiness is fallacious if one does not know
what happiness is. In the same way as there are two different elements in sensation–sensory
46 Cabanac
Figure 4.5 Mechanism by which a behaviour (behaviour 1) that produces displeasure can
be chosen by a subject if another behaviour (behaviour 2) that produces pleasure
is simultaneously chosen. The necessary and sufficient condition for behaviour
2 to occur (action) is that the algebraic sum of affective experience (pleasure)
of the yoked behaviours is positive (a + B < b + A). Capital letters indicate larger
pleasure than lower-case letters
pleasure (highly positive but transient) and comfort (indifferent but stable) – it is possible to
recognise two elements in the affectivity of global consciousness: positive and transient joy,
and indifferent but stable happiness (Cabanac, 1986, 1995). Happiness is to joy what
comfort is to pleasure (Table 4.1). This duality explains the disappointment expressed by
many a writer and some philosophers when they deal with happiness. They use the word
‘happiness’ to describe a pleasant experience which they expect to last and, when they see
that it is transient, erroneously conclude that happiness does not exist. They should have
used the unambiguous word ‘joy’ (for additional discussion on the nature of happiness, see
Cabanac (1986, 1995)). Thus, the transience of pleasure can be found also with joy.
Table 4.1 Joy is to happiness what pleasure is to comfort
Sensation Consciousness
pleasant pleasure joy

indifferent comfort happiness
Optimisation of behaviour
The word ‘optimality’ applied to behaviour can be ambiguous because it bears somewhat
different meanings when used by ethologists, economists and physiologists (Lea et al.,
1987). Ethologists differentiate between goal and cost. Economists differentiate between
utility and cost. The goal of a subject, as well as utility, is some entity that an optimal
behaviour will tend to maximise, which may appear tautological to the physiologist. The
cost is a characteristic of the environment that the optimal behaviour will tend to minimise.
All would agree that an optimal behaviour gives the maximal net benefit (or fitness) to the
behaving individual. Specialists diverge in their definition of benefit (or fitness). The benefit
can be defined in terms of reproductive efficacy (Krebs and Davies, 1981) as well as financial
profit and physiological function (McFarland, 1985). We are concerned here with this last
aspect: physiological benefit.
To the physiologist a behaviour is optimal when it leads to homeostasis. Optimal behaviour
could be recognised easily when subjects instructed to seek their most pleasurable skin
temperature selected stimuli which, after data analysis, could be described by mathematical
models identical to the models describing the autonomic responses (Cabanac et al., 1972;
Bleichert et al., 1973; Marks and Gonzalez, 1994), or when the best performance coincided
with minimal discomfort (Fig. 4.6). One may wonder whether optimisation, as seen from the
Figure 4.6 Increase in discomfort rate and in the error of performance observed over
various arm positions: in S, the subject adopted the most comfortable natural
position; in F, the wrist was maximally flexed; in E, the arm was maximally
extended vertically; in EF, the subject adopted both F and E
Source: Rossetti et al.(1994).

48 Cabanac
physiologicoptimisation, as seen from the physiologicalal point of view, was also achieved
in the experiments quoted above where subjects maximised the algebraic sum of two modalities
of sensory pleasure. Physiological criteria of optimisation showed that maximisation of
pleasure was the key to optimal behaviour in the experimental conflicts of motivations
studied.
The hypothesis according to which pleasure would also signal optimal mental activity
was tested empirically (Fig. 4.7). Ten subjects played video-golf on a Macintosh computer.
After each hole they were invited to rate their pleasure or displeasure on a magnitude
estimation scale. Their ratings of pleasure correlated negatively with the difference (par
minus their performance), i.e. the better the performance, the more pleasure was reported.
This result would indicate that pleasure is aroused by the same mechanisms, follows the
same laws in physiological and cognitive mental tasks, and leads to the optimisation of
performance.
Conclusions
Given that pleasure is an index of the physiological usefulness of a stimulus and of optimal
function in a mental activity, the law of the common currency renders it inevitable that joy
is the index of a useful conscious event. The relationship of joy with usefulness may become
non-univocal with the increased complexity of the mind process.
Figure 4.7 Results obtained in the golf video-game for the subject with the highest correlation
between performance and affective experience. (Left) Performance and rating
of affective experience plotted over the successive holes of the golf game: the
amplitude of the rating scale was open and left to the subject’s estimation; positive
rating for pleasure and negative rating for displeasure. (Right) Rating of affective
experience (dependent variable) plotted against performance (independent
variable): it can be seen that when performance improved (lower scores), pleasure
increased. This correlation was significant in nine subjects out of ten
Source: Cabanac et al. (1997).

It is obvious that among those events or behaviours that arouse joy there are some whose
usefulness we cannot foresee. The case of drug addiction comes immediately to mind. The
answer to this argument is twofold. First, from a Darwinian point of view it is not necessary
that joy be useful on each mental event. To be passed on to future generations, it is sufficient
that joy gives some advantage to the subjects who possess it. From this point of view, we
can compare pleasure and joy to curiosity. On some occasions the outcome of curiosity may
be noxious. Yet everybody will agree that curiosity gives an evolutionary advantage to the
subjects who possess it. Second, usefulness of sensory pleasure is mostly proximate,
usefulness being judged from its immediate survival value. However, sensory pleasure can be
associated also to long-term usefulness. Sexual pleasure is a powerful reward of reproductive
behaviour. Its usefulness may be assigned to the species, rather than the individual. Similarly,
joy can be the sign of an integrative behaviour, useful in the short term for the subject or in
the long term for the species. The joy of love may have no immediate survival usefulness
(arguably the opposite), but finds its usefulness in the outcoming reproductive behaviour.
Pleasure as an index of useful sensation can be innate or acquired. Similarly, one may easily
accept that homologous joy can be acquired. The hormic joy associated with effort has to be
taught and learnt.
Since no behaviour can escape the law of pleasure maximisation, one may question what
remains of liberty in such a situation. Human liberty is often misunderstood as the freedom
to do anything. Actually it is to be understood as the freedom to choose one’s own way to
maximise pleasure and joy. Among the motivations sorted by Sulzer (1751) as sensory,
intellectual, and moral, the last has always been considered by the philosophers as the most
rewarding.
References
Attia, M. (1984) Thermal pleasantness and temperature regulation in man. Neurosci. Biobehav.
Rev, 8, 335–343.
Attia, M. and Engel, P. (1981) Thermal alliesthesial response in man is independent of skin
location stimulated. Physiol. Behav., 27, 439–444.
Baerends, G.P. (1956) Aufbau des tierischen Verhaltens, in Handbuch der Zoologie (ed. Kükenthal,
W., Krumbach, T.). Teil 10 (Lfg 7). Berlin: De Gruyter & Co.
Bleichert, A., Behling, K., Scarperi, M. and Scarperi, S. (1973) Thermoregulatory behavior of
man during rest and exercise. Pflüg. Arch., 338, 303–312.
Bligh, J. and Johnson, K.G. (1973) Glossary of terms for thermal physiology. J. Appl. Physiol.,
35, 941–961.
Cabanac, M. (1971) Physiological role of pleasure. Science, 173, 1103–1107.
Cabanac, M. (1986) Du confort au bonheur. Psychiatr. Fr., 17, 9–15.
Cabanac, M. (1992) Pleasure: the common currency. J. Theoret. Biol., 155, 173–200.
Cabanac, M. (1995). La quète du plaisir, 169. Montréal: Liber.
Cabanac, M., Massonnet, B. and Belaiche, R. (1972) Preferred hand temperature as a function
50 Cabanac
of internal and mean skin temperatures. J. Appl. Physiol., 33, 699–703.
Cabanac, M., Pouliot, C. and Everett, J. (1997) Pleasure as a sign of efficacy of mental activity.
Eur. Psychol., 2, 226–234.
Fantino, M. (1984) Role of sensory input in the control of food intake. J. Auton. Nerv. Syst., 10,
326–347.
Fantino, M. (1995) Nutriments et alliesthésie alimentaire. Cah. Nutrit. Diétét., 30, 14–18.
Garcia, J. (1990) Learning without memory. J. Cognit. Neurosci., 2, 287–305.
Garcia, J., Lasiter, P.S., Bermudez-Rattoni, F. and Deems, D.A. (1985) A general theory of
aversion learning. Ann. NY Acad. Sci., 443, 8–21.
IUPS Commission for Thermal Biology (1987) Glossary of terms for thermal physiology.
Pflüg. Arch., 410, 567–587.
Krebs, J.R. and Davies, N.B. (1981) An Introduction to Behavioural Ecology, 292. Sunderland,
MA: Sinauer Associates.
Lea, S.E.G., Tarpy, R.M. and Webley, P. (1987) The Individual in the Economy, 627. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
McFarland, D.J. (1985) Animal Behaviour, 576. London: Pitman.
McFarland, D.J. and Sibly, R.M. (1975) The behavioural final common path. Phil. Trans. R. Soc.
Lond., 270, 265–293.
McNamara, J.M. and Houston, A.I. (1986) The common currency for behavioural decisions.
Am. Nat., 127, 358–378.
Marks, L.E. and Gonzalez, R.R. (1974) Skin temperature modifies the plesantness of thermal
stimuli. Nature, 247, 473–475.
Pfaffmann, C. (1960) The pleasures of sensation. Psychol. Rev., 67, 253–268.
Rossetti, Y., Meckler, C. and Prablanc, C. (1994) Is there an optimal arm posture? Deterioration
of finger localization precision and comfort sensation in extreme arm-joint postures. Exp.
Brain Res., 99, 131–136.
Sulzer, M. (1751) Recherches sur l’origine des sentimens agréables et désagréables. Mém. Acad.
R. Sci. Belles Let. Berlin, 7, 57–100.
Tinbergen, N. (1950) The hierarchical organization of mechanisms underlying instinctive
behaviour. Symp. Soc. Exp. Biol., 4, 305–312.
Chapter 5
Emotion and the environment:

the forgotten dimension
Mahtab Akhavan Farshchi and Norman Fisher
Introduction
In the creation of architectural spaces that meet the dynamic, conflicting and complex
multifaceted social and physical requirements, the design discipline has to be informed of
how spaces are perceived, judged and evaluated by their users. For a long time, despite the
multiplicity of place appraisal, there has been the seemingly objective evaluation of buildings
by financial criteria, which has overwhelmingly driven the process. This approach strongly
resembles the Cartesian view of a place as purely a geometrical space. In the late twentieth
century, however, many philosophers, geographers and social psychologists have expanded
the notion of space beyond its geometrical connotations.
For Lefebvre (1994) the search was to find a unitary theory of the physical, mental and
social space aimed to reconcile the mental space, ‘the space of the philosopher’, and real
space, ‘the physical and social spheres in which we live’. Among social psychologists,
Canter (1983) emphasised the social, spatial and services facets of a place. His approach to
place evaluation, empirically supported using facet theory, aimed to explain the
interrelationship between these facets. Other researchers have since applied his approach to
investigate environmental meaning (Groat, 1985), and building users’ evaluation of places
(Hacket and Foxall, 1995). Among contemporary geographers Massey (1994, 1995) and
Harvey (1989) have critically analysed the social relations and spatial organisation of the
space created under the ruling of a capitalist system of production.
Generally, advances in the theory of the place on the one hand, and the empirical evidence
in support of the multifaceted impact of the place on the individual’s social behaviour on the
other, have induced the emergence of a new approach to building appraisal which focuses not
only on the geometry of space, but also on its social, cultural and emotive aspects. Place
appraisal is partly an attitudinal response. An attitude is expressed as ‘an evaluative response
to an individual, a group or a thing’ (Hewstone et al., 1997). Evaluative responses have
cognitive, affective, and behavioural components, and studies in social and cognitive
52 Farshchi and Fisher
psychology have suggested that these three components are correlated with one another. A
positive thought is associated with a positive feeling and hence behaviour, although thoughts,
actions and feelings may vary in their degree of positivity or negativity. This tripartite model
of attitude has been tested empirically and has been accepted as a valid framework. The
model presented in this chapter assimilates a conceptual framework for building appraisal,
taking account of the above principles.
Purpose, intention and goal-directed behaviour
The theory of the ‘place’ was first introduced as a non-design theory of place appraisal by
Canter (1983) and originated from environmental and social psychology research. The essence
of Canter’s contribution is in his emphasis on the purposive nature of human activity and
the dependence of behaviour on place. Other theories, such as the theory of reasoned action
(Ajzen and Madden, 1986), also predict the actual behaviour of the individual as a function
of their intention to perform a particular action. Behavioural intentions are determined by
three factors: (a) the attitude towards performing; (b) other subjective norms of the individual;
and (c) perceived behavioural control. The last of these reflects the individual’s belief about
how easy or difficult performance of a given behaviour is likely to be. Since individuals are
different, their purposes can also vary according to their particular social and individual
circumstances. Evidence suggests that age, gender, education, status or social role can affect
attitudes. On the whole, individual or group purposes are inspired by a number of social or
economic motivators. People get engaged in varied activities to fulfil their social or economic
roles. Architectural spaces are designed for human activities and so depend on technology for
their operations. The character of a space affects human emotions and behaviour. Thus
success in design depends on how well the space satisfies the range of human needs of the
occupants.
Environmental meaning and evaluation
The appraisal and the expression of satisfaction owes much to the structure of our thinking
processes and thus to the languages used as the communication medium. In the evolutionary
process of brain development, languages have become the vehicles for further advances and
have enabled communication of concepts (although not all communication is through language).
Sternberg (1996) has briefly described the process by which we allocate meaning to concepts:
We encode meanings into memory through concepts–ideas (mental representations) to

which we may attach various characteristics and with which we may connect various
Emotion and the environment 53
other ideas, such as through propositions – as well as through images and perhaps also
motor pattern for implementing particular procedures.
So the question is, how can attributing meaning affect appraisal? The answer may be found
in the hidden cognitive responses that mediate between external stimuli and overt behavioural
responses (Fiedler, 1996, p. 136). To explain cognitive responses one needs to understand
stages of the cognitive process as well as comprehending the social nature of information
processing. Fiedler (1996) describes a process starting from perceptual inputs to behavioural
outputs, characterised by various feedback loops. There is a logical order in the cognitive
process: perception results in earlier stages, and categorisation takes place in later stages (see
Fig. 5.1). This explanation suggests that we cannot categorise a building as belonging to some
architectural style unless we have perceived the building, but we can perceive building
attributes independently of style categorisation. Cultural and subjective norms affect cognitive
processes and their representations in language via meanings that are attributed to them.
The social aspect of attitude
To understand and explain social behaviour and attitude formation (i.e. productivity,
satisfaction at work, or affective appraisal of places), we need to emphasise the social nature
of the cognitive process. Research on place evaluation is enriched by the inclusion of the
cognitive processes and also by emphasising the social nature of information processing.
Sensory experience
Within our nervous system receptors receive sensory information (as sensations via the
eyes, ears, nose and skin) while effectors transmit motor information (e.g. movements of the
large and small muscles). The body acts in response to the information that it receives,
although little of this enters our consciousness. Sensations are the data of perception, though
sensation and perception of an object are not the same thing. Errors may occur through
Figure 5.1 Conceptual framework for cognitive stages in information processing

Source: Fiedler (1996).
‘intelligent leaps of the mind’ leading to illusion (Gregory, 1997), which raises the question
of what is ‘objective’ and what is ‘subjective’. Locke (1690), the precursor of modern
psychology, suggested that there are two kinds of characteristics: the primary
characteristics, such as hardness, mass and extension of objects in space and time, are free
from the mind and are objective; the secondary characteristics do not exist in the world but
are created within us, and are therefore subjective. The secondary characteristics are affected
by the state of the sensing organism. For example, colours can change if we look through
haze or wine.
Our senses operate independently from each other but can naturally reinforce one
another. We can distinguish the colour of a flower despite its smell, or its touch. However,
when remembering that flower, our experience is based on our memory stored as a series of
representations with particular characteristics. Particular features of the object may influence
this representation; such as shape, smell or colour. Canter (1977) explains the role of
human memory in its ability to ‘discover ways of escaping from the complete sway of
immediate circumstances’ by building up a residue of experience which it can utilise later.
Bartlett (1932) first introduced the notion of ‘schemata’:
The sensory cortex is a storehouse of past experiences. They may rise into
consciousness as images but more often, as in the case of spatial impressions, remain
outside central consciousness. Here, they form organised models of ourselves which
may be called schemata. Such schemata modify the impressions produced by incoming
sensory impulses in such a way that the final sensations of position or locality rise
into consciousness charged with a relation to something that has gone before.
The schemata, however, are not only concerned with the real and physical characteristics
of an object or a thing itself. The schemata of a building can be of the image of the building
in its own right or as part of a bigger reality such as a town, or a community. People usually
form the representations of reality that are in accord with their purposes, motivation and
interest. Memory retrieval ability is affected by our emotions, moods, state of
consciousness, schemata, and other internal contextual features (Sternberg, 1996, p. 273).
Imperceptibility
In addition to the stimuli that can be processed by our sensory system, the environment
affects us in other ways, which are not recognisable to us. Such stimuli can cause changes
in our psychological state, which apparently lack any conscious experience of their cause.
Harmful imperceptible stimuli are invisible lights, gases, chemical compounds, radiation,
etc., which may be harmful to our well-being. Our bodies, for example, have not developed
mechanisms to detect carbon monoxide. Small doses of this gas can result in feelings of
exhaustion, fatigue, lassitude and drowsiness. Nitrous oxide, or ‘laughing gas’, has a distinctive
odour, but it is not as famous for its smelling quality as it is for its laughing (Russell and
Snodgrass, 1987).
Perception
Perception consists of a set of complex processes by which we recognise, organise, and

make sense of the sensations we receive from environmental stimuli (Sternberg, 1996).
Theories of perception can be divided into two main groupings. Bottom-up theories
(sometimes called data-driven theories), such as the Gestalt school or Gibson’s ecological
model, start from the bottom, or the physical stimulus, such as the observable pattern or
form that is being perceived and is then categorised and organised into concepts. Top-down
theories focus on the high-level cognitive processes, existing knowledge, and prior
expectations. Empirical evidence suggests that these theories are not as incompatible as
they may sound. Generally, it is accepted that perception depends on active physiological
processes. Marr (1982, p. 127) has proposed a computational theory of visual perception
that combines the richness of the sensory information and the value of prior knowledge
and experience in perception. This theory has been used as a basis for the application of
artificial intelligence on visual perception. In Marr’s view, shapes are derived from images
via three essential stages: (a) the primal sketches which describe intensity changes, locations
of critical features such as terminal points, and local geometrical relations; (b) the 2 1/2-D
sketch, giving a preliminary analysis of depth, surface discontinuities, and so on, in a frame
that is centred on the viewer; (c) a 3-D model representation, in an object-centred co-
ordinate system, so that we see objects as much as they are in 3-D space though they are
presented from just one viewpoint.
The nature of emotion
The functions of emotion are regarded as being to probe the nervous system into play to
prepare the organism to cope with threatening or stressful situations. The presence of this
activity motivates an organism to make a response to decrease it. Emotion is a crucial
mechanism for survival, which provides an adaptive response to stimuli in the environment.
The physiological response of the organism to the stimuli is the production of emotional
behaviour. Speculations about the nature of emotions have engaged philosophers from as
far back as the ancient Greek civilisation to the present day. The dominant theory up to the
1920s was the James–Lange theory, which proposed that bodily changes follow directly
from perception of the existing facts. Our feeling about these changes is what they regarded
as emotions. Cannon’s (1929) critique of the James–Lange theory offered an alternative by
suggesting that emotions were the results of concurrent brain stem and cortical events. The
main question however, remained:
Do we experience emotion because we perceive our bodies in a particular way, or are

there specific emotional neutral patterns which respond to environmental events and
then release bodily and visceral expressions?
The behaviourist school in the decades after Cannon insisted on dealing with only the
objective and the observable as the basic psychological data, which implied that behaviour
and action are determined by the knowledge and thought of the organism. A change of
direction in cognitive theories of emotion was made by Schachter and Singer (1962). The
main contribution of this theory was the acknowledgement of visceral arousal as a necessary
condition for emotional experience, yet explaining the quality of emotion as depending on
cognitive and perceptual evaluations of the external world and the internal state. The recent
theories of emotion have tried to explain the role of emotions in adaptive behaviour.
Gregory (1997) explains this development:
Rather than emotion appearing as an interfering, irrelevant, and chaotic state of affairs,
it seems that different kinds of situations (and cognitions) become especially marked
if they occur in the ‘emotional’ visceral context. This notion corresponds with the
common experience that emotionally tinged events occupy a special place in our
memories. The visceral component of the emotion may well serve as an additional cue
for retrieval from memory of specific events, and sets them apart from the run-of-the-
mill catalogue of events. The ‘emotional’ memory of a visit to a theatre is selected
from among all the plays we have seen; it is ‘special’. . . . Current wisdom would
suggest that any discrepancy, any interruption of expectations or of intended actions,
produces undifferentiated visceral (automatic) arousal. . . . The quale of the subsequent
emotion will then depend on the ongoing cognitive evaluation (meaning, analysis,
appraisal) of the current state of affairs.
Mandler (1984) provided a contrasting view of the affective experience to that of Schachter
and Singer’s (1962). This view regarded the affective experience as a result of the arousal of
the automatic nervous system and the cognitive processing of information about that
environment and stored representations of the previous experience with that environment.
However, Purcell (1986, 1992) argued that in this process the schema-based processing of
environmental experience can be interrupted by the discrepancy between aspects of the
environment and the prototypical basis for the default values in the schema. He further
stressed the cognitive components of the emotion (1992).
In recent decades, the role of emotions in directing human behaviour has also received a
lot of attention from managers (Locke, 1996). The cross-country studies of emotions
reveal that people hold norms of emotion perception in which the socially desirable
emotions are those which are perceived to be positive and moderate (Paez et al., 1996).
Regulation of emotions (i.e. increasing positive feelings rather than negative ones) therefore
could help managers within organisations. Emotions are essential parts of the fabric of
human experience and play a crucial role in determining the nature and quality of a person’s
day-to-day functioning. Earlier research also revealed that despite the seemingly apparent
nature of emotions as discrete and separate aspects of human functioning, these are in
reality linked to cognition and actions, which together are the interdependent aspects of
the information-processing–acting system mediating the internal and external interaction
of humans with their environments. Hebb (1949) suggested that we often notice those
emotions which interrupt the ongoing behaviour, hence prompting different reactions.
Western’s (1994) model introduced an integrative model of effect regulation, which
converges aspects of behavioural, cognitive, social-cognitive and psychodynamic
perspectives. This model describes effect regulation as a mechanism by which a selective
retention of behavioural and mental processes is maintained.
It has been suggested that emotions have three main components (Mandler, 1984;
Schachter and Singer, 1962). The behavioural component could be ‘expressive (such as
frowns, smiles, weeping, gesture, or tone of voice) or instrumental (such as fight or
aggression)’. The physiological components as argued by Russell and Snodgrass include
‘changes in, or activity clearly inverted by, the automatic nervous system’. The mental
component of emotions is less well specified than the other two named above. It is,
however, implied that the person who is undergoing an emotion is well aware that he or she
is afraid, angry or happy.
Types of emotion
One view classifies emotions into a limited number of key emotions. Some emotion theorists
believe that any type of emotion can be defined in terms of one or more basic emotions.
Ekman (1972), for example, argued that there are at least six basic emotions: sadness,
disgust, anger, fear, surprise, and happiness. Two more emotions, shame and interest, have
been added to the above list by Izard (1977). This is notwithstanding 2000 emotion-
denoting words that exist in the English language. Russell and Snodgrass (1987) have
referred to five types of emotional response, i.e. emotion, mood, affective appraisal,
emotional episodes and emotional dispositions.
Emotions
Generally, emotions refer to a heterogeneous class of different phenomena (Russell

and Snodgrass, 1987). The narrow definition of emotion refers only to such prototypical
episodes as falling in love. Emotions can be broadly defined to include vague feelings of
mood, attitudes, preferences, or just about anything that is not coldly rational (Russell and
Snodgrass, 1987). Zajonc (1980) has defined emotions as bodily feelings that reveal
preferences. Clore and Parrott (1991) identified emotions as the means of conveying
information to individuals about the nature of the psychological situation.
Moods
These are the core emotion-tinged feelings of a person’s subjective state at any given
moment. As Russell and Snodgrass argue, to be in a certain mood is to feel calm, upset,
depressed, excited, unhappy, or neutral. By this definition, a person is always in a mood.
Moods are usually measured in self-report formats in which research begins with a series
of factor-analysis studies. In the study by Nowlis and Nowlis (1956), several bipolar
factors such as pleasure–displeasure and activation–deactivation summarised the mood
domain. There is still much controversy over the proper number of dimensions in the
description of mood. The core of these arguments is whether moods are unipolar or
bipolar. More recent evidence favours bipolarity.
Russell (1980) showed a circumplex model of mood (Fig. 5.2) in which individual mood
descriptors fall in a roughly circular order in a space defined by two underlying bipolar
dimensions of feeling: the first, they argue, is pleasure–displeasure or happiness–
unhappiness, and the second is arousal–sleepiness. In this model pleasure and arousal are
identified as the key dimensions of mood. This circumplex model was developed using 40
descriptors, which were drawn systematically from a set of 105 adjectives. Mehrabian and
Russell (1974) have concluded that: ‘Sensory dimensions are consistently appraised as
mood altering, although this does not necessarily guarantee that they are in fact mood
altering’.
Some aspects of our perception do not need to reach our consciousness to affect us.
This is seen in the effects of lighting in our moods. It has been indicated that sunlight has
a positive effect on humans’ mood (Cunningham, 1979), and artificial light has shown to
have a negative effect on our moods (Thornington, 1975). Hellman (1982) has suggested
that lack of natural sunlight could be a factor in depression, jetlag and sleep disorders in
psychiatric cases. The amount and type of light also seems to affect the migration of birds,
and egg production on poultry farms (Wortman et al., 1964).
Figure 5.2 Circular ordering of mood descriptors

Source: Russell (1980).
Affective appraisal
Affective appraisal refers to our judgements of things as pleasant, attractive, valuable,

likeable, preferable, repulsive and so on. Affective appraisal is always directed towards
a thing, i.e. a quality of the object is appraised. It is the object that appears pleasant or
disgusting. It is distinguished from moods, in which affective appraisal could occur with no
inner emotional feelings. For example, the appraiser may evaluate a subject while experiencing
a certain mood, which is not related to the appraisal event.
Emotional dispositions
These relate to long-term emotions: a tendency to do or think or feel particular things

when the right circumstance occurs. For example, feeling for our parents is an emotional
disposition. Emotional disposition is said to be a disposition because it exists even during
the times when we are not thinking or feeling anything about our parents, but it is manifested
on certain occasions.
Emotional episodes
These are emotional reaction to something, with the reaction typically involving co-
ordinated and distinctive physiological, behavioural and mental changes like
someone, suffering a grief at death, getting angry at someone and being frightened
by a bear in the woods (Russell and Snodgrass, 1987). Emotional episodes have common
characteristics with both affective appraisals and mood. They are about something, as in
affective appraisal, and refer to a core subjective feeling, as in mood. Emotional episodes are
prototypical examples of what is usually meant by ‘emotion’.
Environment and behaviour
Environmental psychology, a growing field of research, has not yet formulated any unified
theory of environment and behaviour. In general there are six theoretical perspectives, which
have been supported by empirical evidence (Bell et al., 1996). These are briefly explained
here.
The arousal approach
In this approach the environmental stimulus affects people by increasing their arousal as
measured physiologically. Arousal here is regarded as an intervening variable with distinct
effects on behaviour. Arousal moves along a continuum of low arousal (towards sleep) to
high arousal. Both pleasant and unpleasant stimuli can heighten arousal. The change in
arousal level causes people to seek information about the their internal states, to find out
whether there is any kind of threat to their well-being. Arousal can therefore affect the level
of performance, since some tasks require higher level of arousal than others. The relationship
between arousal and performance is dependent on the complexity of the task concerned.
Noise, heat and crowding are the most notable environmental factors affecting arousal.
The stimulation load approach
When the information provided by the environment exceeds the individual’s capacity to
process, overload occurs (Bell et al., 1996). The level of interacting environmental stimuli is
important in behaviour. This concept is regarded as environmental load or overstimulation,
which can affect behaviour through its demand on attention and information processing.
Kaplan and Kaplan (1989) have identified four environmental factors contributing to
information overload: (a) a new environment or ‘being away’; (b) an experience that is
extended in time and space; (d) an interesting or engaging environment; and (d) the ability of
the environment to facilitate the achievement of the intended purpose.
Understimulation can also lead to severe anxiety or other psychological anomalies. Research
suggests that environments should provide more complexity and stimulation in order to
restore excitement and a sense of belonging. In order to deal with the problem of
understimulation, Wohlwill (1966) advocated scaling the environment along a number of
dimensions of stimulation, including intensity, novelty, complexity, temporal changes or
variations, surprisingness and incongruity (Bell et al., 1996, p. 122).
The adaptation level
This theory suggests that in order to deal with the problems of overstimulation or
understimulation the environment should provide a mechanism by which we can regulate it
according to our own acceptable levels.
The behaviour constraint approach
The loss of perceived control over environmental stimulation can also lead to arousal or
strain on our capacity for information processing. When individuals perceive that they are
losing control over the environment, they first experience discomfort (negative effect) and
then try to gain some control. Bell et al. (1996) give examples of different types of control:
(a) behavioural (e.g. turning off the noise); (b) cognitive (e.g. deciding that a contaminant in
water is not toxic); and (c) decisional (e.g. choosing to live in a quiet neighbourhood).
The stress approach
Current models regard stress as the outcome of an unbalanced interaction of the person with
its environment (Salvendy, 1997). Elements of the environment such as noise and crowding
are viewed as stressors, although other social factors can also cause stress, such as job
pressures, family discord, or moving to a new home. Stress comprises emotional, behavioural
and physiological components. Generally, stress can stem from three sources: cataclysmic
events, personal stressors and background stressors (Bell et al., 1996). In any case the
probability of an event becoming stressful is determined by how the stress is appraised by
the individual. This cognitive process of stress appraisal is a function of personal factors
(e.g. intellectual resources, knowledge and past experience, and motivation) and cognitive
aspects of the specific stimulus situation (e.g. control over the stimulus, predictability of the
stimulus, and immediacy of the stimulus) (Bell et al., 1996, p. 133).
Stress will occur if the environmental demands are greater than the person’s capabilities,
and/or if the person’s expectations are greater than the environment supplies (Salvendy,
1997, p. 1061). In psychological terms, stress is the response to the individual’s interpretation
of the meaning of environmental events against the individual’s appraisal of her/his coping
resources.
The ecological approach
This approach is primarily concerned with the specific effects of the environment on
behaviour. Barker (1968), the principal advocate of the ecological psychology, believes that
environment and behaviour have ecological interdependencies. According to Barker’s model,
the physical setting of the environment can suggest to us what behaviours we can expect
within that environment.
Emotions as a crucial component of environmental

meaning
Emotions can be regarded as part of a cognitive process revealing the individual’s psycho-
physiological state. Such reactions can be measured using verbal descriptors such as the
studies carried out by Vielhauer (1965) and Russell et al. (1981), or physiological measurements
of the bodily changes. Vielhauer developed a semantic scale for the description of the
physical environment. Using bipolar adjectives, she identified the degree of appropriateness
of each descriptor in the context of six specific environments presented as pictures to her
subjects. She identified four main factors and five sub-factors, which could – independently
of the person or the room – be regarded as the idiosyncratic characteristics of the room itself.
These are: (1) aesthetic appeal; (2) physical organisation; (3) size, and (4) temperature–
ventilation as the main factors and (1a) style; (1b) functional ugliness; (1c) colouring; (2a)
organisation; (2b) cleanliness; (3a) phenomenological size; (3b) physical size; and (5) lighting
as the sub-factors. Russell et al. (1981) tried to separate effect from perception/cognition in
their study of environmental meaning. They reviewed the use of semantic scaling and argued
that the discrepancy between studies in environmental meaning has emerged because they
have measured the different – but highly correlated – components of meaning, i.e. perceptual/
cognitive and affective. Russell et al. (1981) identified various effect-denoting concepts
which could be empirically tested and used as a single system. For example, they hypothesised
a stressful situation as one which is both unpleasant and arousing – a bipolar opposite of a
relaxing situation, which is both pleasant and unarousing.
In design terms the most referred to positive and negative emotions for the description of
the environment are the concepts originating from comfort and stress. Slater (1985) has given
a scientific interpretation of comfort as a pleasant state of physiological, psychological
and physical harmony between a human being and the environment. Comfort is
considered as a multidimensional construct influenced by many factors and, as Zhang (1996)
demonstrated, it does not relate only to physical aspects of things. For example, in her
study, seating comfort was positively correlated with the appearance of the chair. Activities
are the individuals’ responses to environmental interpretations, i.e. the meanings that they
attribute to their environment. Therefore, human activity is as much about individuals as it
is about the social aspect of their interactions.
Generally, stress relates to negative effects such as nervousness, tension and anxiety and
can cause a deficit in task performance and interpersonal behaviour. Evans and Cohen (1987)
have argued that stress is a person- or situation-based concept. For example, crowding
causes stress by excessive stimulation; to avoid that an individual maintains a preferred
interaction distance from others in order to avoid excessive arousal, stimulation, and a
variety of stressors associated with proximity that is too close. Evidence suggests that
individual differences play a role in perception of density. Other studies have shown different
responses from female and male respondents to density. Ross (1973), for example, found
that female groups responded positively to high occupation density while for male groups it
was negative. This demonstrates that both genders follow norms, which belong to their
specific sex. Further, Taylor (1981) has argued that the consequences of density can be
mediated by perceived control, social structure, and type of activity and physical features of
the environment.
Stress can have both positive and negative consequences. Different activities require
different levels of stress.
Can we assign affective appraisals for places?
Most of our activities are conducted within built spaces (e.g. we buy our food at supermarkets,
walk and relax in our gardens, or dine in restaurants). Our appraisals depend on an array of
factors, some derived from our sensory experience and some based on our past experiences
mediated by culture and our subjective norms. For example, we may like a restaurant for its
tranquil lighting, or comfortable temperature, the convenience of its location, aesthetic quality,
tasty food or hospitable service. The affective qualities of the space such as liveliness,
attraction, calmness or excitement can help us store and then retrieve information from our
long-term memory which otherwise is forgotten. Thus in the evaluation of places we should
allow for measuring emotive as well as cognitive components of appraisal. Considering that
environmental setting can affect behaviour (Barker, 1968), we may conclude that given a
specific emotional content for a space we can expect certain behaviour to occur.
Development of a conceptual model for affective

appraisal of spaces
Architectural design can benefit from broadening its scopes by consideration of achievements
in social sciences, especially environmental and social psychology. Design, a problem-
solving activity, aims to create spatial solutions to respond to human habitual needs, which
may appear in the form of physical, technical, social, managerial or functional constraints.
Achieving a balance between these factors requires a systematic approach in order to create
optimal solutions in the form of habitable geometrical spaces, yet with identity and inspiration,
and to complement human interaction and well-being. Thus, understanding human needs and
aspirations can be considered as one of the most crucial parts of any design conceptualisation.
Design is generally an incremental and hierarchical process. Some decisions, such as the
spatial relationships between different spaces, are part of early design decisions, while
others, such as reconfiguration of the internal organisation of the space, can be modified by
the changing need of the space (Farshchi and Fisher, 1997; Farshchi, 1998).
To distinguish between different contents and contexts of design information, Farshchi
and Fisher (1997) offered a preliminary model, which divided design information into two
interrelated levels, i.e. macro and micro. Form, structure and style convey social and cultural
meanings. Design starts from development of a core central concept which is based on the
type of activities (functions) expected from the building, the needs of users with social and
personal motives, and purposes that affect how well they can achieve their individual and
social goals. Technology can be used to facilitate the functions and performance of activities.
The conceptualisation of design is a cognitive process. Design can increase its user
friendliness by better understanding of the concept of needs and how these are evaluated.
Concepts in architectural design are socially rooted. In the Western cultural context there
seems to exist commonly held values or beliefs for the concept of ‘home’ or ‘church’. In the
case of airports, this new experience for humankind, the question of purpose is left unanswered.
With the high rate of technological and sociological change and increasing number of users,
the existing concepts of airports are vague and unsatisfactory. Seeking a philosophical
justification for a relatively new means of transport (air travel) motivated a group of architects
and historians to come together at the 1998 Airport Conference at the Architectural
Association in London. It was claimed that in our modern society such narratives are vague
and confusing: for example, we are not sure what to expect from our experience in an airport.
Do we need to use airports as we use train stations? Should they be spaces of timeless
quality, being universal and inviting, or places of no identity where the notion of ‘place’ is
diluted? Should airports be regarded as crossroads to our global cultures, where interaction is
carried at levels of leisure, arts, and trade? Thus, fulfilling a philosophical need is also part of
the design conceptualisation.
The model presented in Fig. 5.3 offers a form of generic methodology that can be adopted
for different design circumstances. The concept of satisfaction here is regarded as a positive
or negative response to environmental stimuli. Individual differences such as age, gender,

physical abilities, past experience and education, as well as social factors such as goal/
purpose, intention, social role, cultural values, and norms, can affect preference. The model
suggests that although individual differences are important in the selection of the incoming
information, socially held values and role are useful predictors for emergent behaviours. The
individual’s past experience can increase or decrease the level of arousal due to their degree of
novelty or mere exposure (familiarity). Behaviour in groups can be mediated by the groups’
norms.
The incoming information (noise, light, temperature, smell and touch) reaches the individual
through the sensory organs. The information is selected and processed which is in line with
the individual’s purposes or motivations. The level of adaptation to environmental stimulus
varies in individuals, and some may require a higher level of environmental control than
others.
To provide practical steps for improving designs’ user-friendliness and satisfaction, we
earlier referred to research on ‘place’. In turning a physically structured space into a ‘place’
Figure 5.3 A conceptual model for the appraisal of spaces

with philosophical, social, and artistic identity or meaning, we should also explain needs as
a holistic concept to help the definition of design attributes. Perceived needs are a social
phenomenon. As a control mechanism, culture can play a significant role in mediating needs,
norms of behaviour, acceptable values and expectations in any society. Such norms of
behaviour can also provide codes of acceptable concepts in architectural design. Farshchi
(1998) gave a description of needs in architectural design, i.e. socio-psychological, economic
and philosophical.
Overall there are two worlds of abstraction in which architecture is conceived – the ‘real’
and the ‘experienced’. In creating an architectural space the perceived world of the architect/
designer, or the ‘experienced’, should closely resemble the ‘real’ one. The journey of the
architect/designer between the two realms finally resolves in his or her finding a formal
solution to the ‘problem’ or ‘design context’ via architectural forms. None the less, the
dialectic process between form and context may fail to reflect or embrace all intricacies or
complexities of the real world. To emancipate design from the tangle of designers’ subjectivity,
the design problem needs to be objectively defined, i.e. the collective representation of the
experienced world by members of society which become the building’s beneficiaries. Yet,
objective thinking is contingent on a number of presuppositions as follows. First, design is
in effect a social phenomenon, with the aims of enclosing for the purpose of exclusion,
partitioning, spatial fixation, and maintaining spatial distances between people, as it is also
to facilitate communication and traffic (Ankerl, 1981). Second, social spaces are affected by
the social needs for territorial sovereignty of not only the residents, but also the social
establishment, which is a need even when the space is empty. Ankerl (1981) described the
characteristics of the architectural design as the creation of spaces, which reflect the physical,
technical, social and psychological needs. Architectural space in his terminology is expressed
as:
A closed surface with human access into its concavity . . . where the envelope has at
least one side defining an inside or interior . . . a volumetric magnitude with particular
geometric shape . . . sensed by more than one sensory organ . . . has a physical language
. . . has a purposeful creation so to isolate a numerable set of individuals for certain
activities . . . form interference from the broader physical and social environment . . .
protects the intimacy or privacy of small or large groups . . . stimulates communication.
Conclusions
Architectural spaces can either facilitate or restrict human actions and thus cause positive or
negative emotions. Modern buildings are criticised for their incompatibility with their
surroundings, unsatisfactory sensory qualities or alienation of people who use them or live
in or around them. Current design theorists, such as Gero (1996), have aimed to develop
detailed accounts of design by providing a breakdown of design parameters in terms of
functions, behaviour and structures. Although this approach has provided a language by
which design tasks can be rationalised and formalised, these can be criticised for their
disregard of the emotional content of design. In order to develop a taxonomy of the concept
of evaluation/satisfaction we need to understand the meaning of concepts such as comfort,
convenience and efficiency to the individuals. As the experience of each individual is varied
and is based on her or his personal needs and expectations, it is important to know whether
there are any commonly held views among building users. Due to the temporal nature of our
experience within the built environment, it is important to identify the implications of this
variable.
Earlier we referred to the notions of familiarity and novelty. Through the passage of time
and repeated exposures, our sensory system makes sense of environmental clues by developing
schemata. Appraisal is largely affected by the characteristics of new stimuli causing increased
levels of arousal. To avoid boredom and sleepiness, and to generate enthusiasm and motivation
in the occupants and other building users, design continuously has to provide new stimulation
and motivation to maintain arousal and positive feelings. At the same time, spaces which
have a changeable population of users, such as in airports, require information that is
communicated in a logical order and also spaces which offer an interesting and engaging
experience for those who work there.
The amount of information that we can process through our sensory system is also
important for our overall satisfaction, and as our experience is dynamic and multidimensional
we need to select from an array of environmental clues those which are pertinent to our
purposes and goals. The analogy proposed here is what we call the ‘motorway’ and the
‘countryside’ driving experiences. This example refers to movements within the space at
various speeds. At higher speeds of movement, due to an information overload, the brain
selects only those environmental clues, that are directly important to its sensory needs,
while at lower speeds, in addition to the sensory information, attention can also be drawn to
more specific clues such as the distance between street lamps or the texture of the road,
which relate to specific goals or purposes of the driver, i.e. driving. At the same time, the
driver may also process information, which may be somewhat distant from her immediate
purpose, i.e. enjoying the scenery at a country lane. Limitations in the information capacity
of the brain require rationalisation of the stored information. But retrieval can be improved
when an ongoing experience is associated with some emotional response to the external
stimulus.
This chapter aimed to highlight the importance of the emotive components of the cognitive
process in the appraisal of places, i.e. evaluating and judging places. The underlying cognitive
stages such as perception, categorisation, organisation, inferences and retrieval of the stimulus
events can be intervened by attention, encoding and thinking. Design as an information
system can help stimulate attention and can help the process of encoding and schemata
modification. User-friendly design will reduce unnecessary stress and other negative emotions,
while maximising positive emotions.
References
Ajzen, I. and Madden, T. (1986) Prediction of goal-directed behaviour: attitudes, intentions, and
perceived behavioural control. J. Exp. Psychol., no. 22, 435–474.
Ankerl, G. (1981) Experimental Sociology of Architecture: A Guide to Theory, Research and
Literature. Mouton Publishers.
Barker, R.G. (1968) Ecological Psychology: Concepts and Methods for Studying the Environment
of Human Behaviour. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Bartlett, F.C. (1932) Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Bell, P.A., Greene, T.C., Fisher, J.D. and Baum, A. (1996) Environmental Psychology (4th edn).
USA: Harcourt Brace.
Cannon, W.B. (1929) Bodily Changes in Pain, Hunger, Fear and Rage, 2nd edn. New York:
Appleton.
Canter, D. (1977) The Psychology of the Place. London: Architectural Press Ltd.
Canter, D. (1983) The purposive evaluation of places: a facet approach. Environ. Behav. 15,
no. 6., Nov.
Clore, G.L. and Parrott, L. (1991) Moods and their vicissitudes: thoughts and feelings as
information, in J.P. Forgas (ed.), Emotion and Social Judgements, 107– 124. Sydney,
Australia: Pergamon Press.
Cunningham, M.R. (1979) Weather, mood and helping behaviour. J. Personality Soc. Psychol.
no. 37, 1947–1956.
Ekman, P. (1972) Universals and cultural differences in facial expression of emotions, in J.R.
Cole (ed.) Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Evans, G.W. and Cohen, S. (1987) Environmental stress, in D. Stokols and I. Altman (eds),
Handbook of Environmental Psychology, vol. 1, 571–610.
Farshchi, M. (1998) The theory of design information – a hierarchical approach, 2nd European
Conference on Product and Process Modelling in the Building Industry, BRE, Garston,
August.
Farshchi, M. and Fisher, G.N. (1997) The emotional content of the physical space, paper
presented to RICS, COBRA 97 Conference, Portsmouth, 10–12 Sept.
Fiedler, K. (1996) Processing social information for judgements and decisions, in M. Hewstone,
W. Stroebe, and G.M. Stephenson, Introduction to Social Psychology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Gero, J. (ed.) (1996) Advances in Formal Design Methods for CAD. London: Chapman and Hall.
Gregory, R. (1997) The Oxford Companion to the Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Groat, L. ( 1985) Psychological Aspects of Contextual Compatibility in Architecture: A Study of
Environmental Meaning, PhD thesis, University of Surrey.
Hacket, P.M.W. and Foxall, G.R. (1995) The structure of consumers’ place evaluation, Environ.
Behav., 27, no. 3.
Harvey, D. (1989) The Conditions of Post Modernity. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hebb, D.O. (1949) The Organisation of Behaviour. New York: Wiley.
Hellman, H. (1982) Guiding light, Psychol. Today, no. 10, 22–28.
Hewstone, M., Mastead, A.S.R. and Stroebe, W. (ed.) (1997) The Blackwell Reader in Social
Psychology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Izard, C.E. (1977) Human Emotions. London: Plenum.
Kaplan, S. and Kaplan, R. (1989) The visual environment: public participation in design and
planning, J. Soc. Issues, no. 45, 59–86.
Lefebvre, H. (1994) The Production of Space (translated by D. Nicholson Smith). Oxford:
Blackwell.
Locke, J. (1690) An essay concerning human understanding, in R. Gregory (1996) The Oxford
Companion to the Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Locke, K. (1996) A funny thing happened! The management of consumer emotions in service
encounters, Org. Sci., 7, no. 1, Jan./Feb., 40–59.
Mandler, G. (1984) Mind and Body: Psychology of Emotion and Stress. New York: Norton.
Marr, D.C. (1982) Vision, San Francisco, CA: Freeman.
Massey, D. (1994) Space, Place and Gender. Oxford: Blackwell.
Massey, D. (1995) Spatial Division of Labour, Social Structures and the Geography of Production
(2nd edn). London: Macmillan.
Mehrabian, A. and Russell, J.R. (1974) An Approach to Environmental Psychology. MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Nowlis, V. and Nowlis, H.H. (1956). The description and analysis of mood. Ann. NY Acad. Sci.,
no. 65, 345–355.
Paez, D., Marques, J. and Insua, P. (1996) The representation of emotions in groups: the relative
impact of social norms, positive–negative asymmetry and familiarity on the perception of
emotions. J. Soc. Psychol., 26, 43–59.
Purcell, A.T. (1986) Environmental perception and affect, a schema discrepancy model. Environ.
Behav., 18, no. 1.
Purcell, A.T. (1992) Abstract and specific physical attributes and experience of landscape. J.
Environ. Man. 34, 159–177.
Russell, J.A. (1980) A circumplex model of affect, J. Personality Soc. Psychol., no. 39, 1161–
1178.
Russell, J.A., Ward, L.M. and Pratt, G. (1981) Affective quality attributed to environments – a
factor analysis study. Environ. Behav., 13, no. 3, 256–288.
Russell, J. and Snodgrass, J. (1987). Emotion and the environment, in D. Stokols and I. Altman
(eds) Handbook of Environmental Psychology, vol. 1, New York.
Salvendy, G. (1997) Handbook of Human Factors, 2nd edn. New York: Wiley.
Schachter, S. (1971) Emotion, Obesity and Crime. American Psychologist.
Schachter, S. and Singer, J.E. (1962) Cognitive, social and physiological determinants of emotional
state. Psychol. Rev., no. 69, 379–399.
Slater, K. (1985) Human Comfort. Springfield Thomas.
Sternberg, R.J. (1996) Cognitive Psychology. USA: Harcourt Brace.
Taylor, R.B. (1981) Perception of density. Environ. Behav., 13, no. 1, Jan.
Thornington, L. (1975) Artificial lighting – what colour and spectrum, Lighting Des. Appli., no.
16, 16–21.
Vielhauer, J.A. (1965) The Development of a Semantic Scale for the Description of the Physical
Environment, PhD dissertation, Louisiana State University.
Western, D. (1994) Towards an integrative model of affect regulation: applications to social–
psychological research, J. Personality, 62, no. 4, Dec.
Wohlwill, J.F. (1966) The physical environment: a problem for a psychology of stimulation, J.
Soc. Issues, no. 22, 29–38.
Wortman, R.J., Axelord, J. and Fischer, J.E. (1964) Melatonin synthesis in the gland: effect of
light mediated by the sympathetic nervous system, Science, no. 143, 1328–1329.
Zajonc, R.B. (1980) Feeling and thinking: preferences need no inferences. Am. Psychol., 39,
117–123.
Zhang, L. (1996) Identifying factors of comfort and discomfort in sitting. Human Factors,
38(3), 377–389.
Chapter 6
A broad definition of comfort

as an aid to meeting
commitments on carbon
dioxide reduction
Max Fordham
This book is about the productive workplace. I am an environmental engineer for buildings
and so I am concerned about perceptions based on data from the eyes, the ears, and the
thermal sensors of the body. Human beings evolved in the world in a form that was adapted
to the wide range of environments occurring naturally. Light levels vary from 0 to 100,000
lux, sound levels from very quiet to enough to break the eardrums, and temperatures
characterised by ranges from, let us say, -40°C to +50°C. We have not adapted to meet the
extremes of environment, but we are adapted to survive in the most common middle
ground. We have developed buildings to relieve the stress caused by extreme environmental
conditions and to extend the range of locations in the world where we can survive. We
imagine that by reducing the environmental stress we can increase our ability to be
productive.
As an engineer, I am not professionally equipped to comment on the impact on people
of their neighbours. However, as the son of a psychologist I am very much aware that my
ability to function is dependent on my internal state of mind and the impact of my fellow
workers. I am writing this before hearing the speakers at a conference, and in case it seems
necessary I would like to remind you that a piece of research exists into the effects on
productivity of altering the physical environment. Each alteration to the physical
environment produces an immediate improvement in productivity. After a while the
improvement tails off until the next alteration produces another spurt. Eventually, the
environment is restored to the original status quo and the productivity increases. My
psychological understanding of this phenomenon is that productivity of people is improved
if they know they are loved, and special attention, such as special teaching or special
changes to the environment, are signs of love which improve productivity.
We cannot form the future without understanding the status quo. I think the future is
dominated by a conflict. On the one hand, economic growth requires that we invent new
things to consume and that we consume more of those things which we have already
72 Fordham
invented. On the other hand, the success of any species of organism tends to produce an
explosion in its consumption and waste so that it exhausts the resources available and is
engulfed in its waste product. This is happening to us. It doesn’t matter which resource or
which sink you focus on, we can see that neither the sources nor the sinks are infinite and
we had better think of ways of becoming less greedy. Fossil fuels, fish, tropical rain
forests, cobalt, copper, water – you name it, the resource is limited. The atmosphere, the
sea, the land, all of these sinks for our waste products are being altered by our activities.
The pressures of economic growth are provided by the market and call for:
• air-conditioning as a sign of status in even the most benign climates

• heating to standards to encourage us to wear lightweight clothes in the winter
• electric lighting to supplement adequate natural light.
The forces of the market are very powerful, and I do not care to predict that we will beat
them. However, I hope we shall and that we will meet the target of designing buildings for
temperate climates that need no heating energy, that need no electricity for lighting if the
sun is above the horizon, that need no electrical energy for refrigeration nor electrical
energy to circulate air through buildings. We do not know how to meet these aims but we
do know how to try. One of the first issues we need to understand is what constitutes
comfort. Comfort has been defined by Mike Humphreys of Oxford Brookes University as
‘the absence of discomfort; discomfort is alleviated by making adjustments’ (1995). This
may seem arcane, but it is better than the ASHRAE definition: ‘Comfort is a state of mind’.
Ole Fanger ISO (1994) has carried out measurements on the parameters which affect
thermal comfort as follows: the amount of clothing, the dry bulb air temperature, the
moisture content of the air, long-wave radiation, short-wave radiation, and the rate of
metabolism of an individual. These measurements show that with the right combination of
the parameters, a person maintains the correct skin temperature with a minimum amount
of heat loss by evaporation and resides in a state which does not prompt him or her to want
to make adjustments. If one wants to predict whether a person will be able to make suitable
adjustments in a particular environment, that can be done using the Fanger equations. We
must all be able to envisage what it is like to sit in a building wearing light clothes and shirt
sleeves and deciding to put on a light jersey or cardigan. Having put on the extra clothes,
you might decide it is too warm and decide to take them off. The light jersey or cardigan
makes a difference to the Fanger Comfort Vote of about two points. Thus you can see that
the Fanger Comfort Vote Measurement is pretty subtle, and one point would hardly make
a person want to make further adjustments. They could be said to be comfortable. A wide
range of radiation environments and air temperature environments produce comfortable
conditions, and it is absolutely not necessary to try to control each parameter at a centrally
Abroad definition of comfort 73
defined position. To try to standardise a set of environmental criteria for the workplace
which are unnecessarily tightly defined will lead to expensive installations and extravagant
energy use.
There is already a European Directive which requires the humidity in rooms to be
‘reasonable’. Imagine sitting in a committee and refusing to agree that the humidity should
be reasonable! The statement is either meaningless, in which case it should be eliminated
from any document, or it is without bound, namely the relative humidity should be
between 0 per cent and 100 per cent: is that reasonable? No, we can all agree that 50 per
cent is reasonable, and it is. However, to maintain 50 per cent relative humidity in a
building in the winter is tantamount to making a requirement for refrigeration and air
conditioning. I propose that ‘reasonable’ for relative humidity is anything within the range
10 per cent to 90 per cent, with the proviso that the individuals in the space can make
adjustments to the environment to bring the Fanger Comfort Vote score in the range
-2 to +2.
The Fanger conditions cannot be extrapolated to all the conditions that people enjoy.
People spend money to lie in the sun on tropical beaches in conditions which are too hot
for the Fanger comfort criteria. They swim in cold water, they walk on mountains, and the
Fanger system is not adaptable enough to explain their thermal situation. As the temperature
rises, one of the involuntary adjustments that people make is to open the capillary vessels
in the flesh immediately under the skin and raise the skin temperature. An additional
adjustment is that glands which produce sweat are activated so that water collects on the
surface of the skin and heat can be lost by evaporation. The blood is at a temperature of
37°C, and if the air outside were at 37°C and saturated then no heat could be lost from the
surface of the skin to the air. However, the Fanger equations predict that no heat can be lost
at a temperature of 35°C because the skin temperature is implicit in the equations and is set
at 35°C. In order to understand extreme conditions we need to modify our model.
The adjustments which people might make are constrained by the social environment.
My company was asked to design an office building in Manchester without air-conditioning.
We explained that the occupants of the building would have to make certain adjustments.
For example, during hot summer weather in the office it would be good for them to take off
their coats and loosen their ties. However, as solicitors they said that this was not permitted,
and we had to say that if that was the case they needed an air-conditioned building. I am
sure we have all experienced the situation of being comfortable in nothing but a bathing
suit. The air temperature is likely to have been well above 30°C, possibly with
some radiation and a good deal of air movement. It is pretty difficult to design a
building in the UK where the summer temperature is as high as that, and we might
manage to enjoy the feeling of working dressed in bathing suits. This is not a
sensible proposal. Figure 6.1 shows various kinds of temperature associated with
74 Fordham
Figure 6.1 Temperature plotted against predicted mean vote (PMV) for five types of clothing:
(1) socks, shoes, briefs, light long-sleeved shirt, tie, light sweater, vest, jacket,
heavy trousers; (2) socks, shoes, briefs, light short-sleeved shirt, tie, jacket,
light trousers; (3) socks, shoes, briefs, light short-sleeved shirt, light trousers;
(4) flip-flops, shorts, light short-sleeved shirt; (5) no clothes at all!
different types of clothing and comfort votes. It shows a set of conditions which can
easily be achieved during the summer in non-air-conditioned British buildings.
Thus I am advocating that the design summer temperatures in the UK should be
modified so that we should specify that on a few days in the year people might want
to work dressed in shorts, a short-sleeved shirt and sandals. The temperature of the
building during the day would fluctuate so that they would probably want to put on a
jersey in the morning and take it off during the afternoon. When we come to winter
conditions, a similar set of adjustments about clothes should be adopted; I would like
some attention paid to the design of clothes which allow free and easy movement and
comfort at quite low air temperatures. We could then design buildings which needed no
heating.
In order to prevent buildings from getting too hot in the summer, they need to be
cooled down by ventilation at night. There have to be ventilation openings which can
be left open without harm from intruders or excessive wind and rain. This is a design
problem and it can be solved. The building needs to be cooled down at night to as low
a temperature as is tolerable. With clothes – socks, shoes, briefs, a light short-sleeved
shirt, sweater, jacket – the building is comfortable in the morning at about 19°C. Then
during the day the building and the environment heat up; a person then removes the
sweater and jacket and possibly loosens their tie, and is still reasonably comfortable at
19°C to 30°C. You might narrow the range and say 20°C to 28°C. The heat released
into the building by computers, people, and light has to be absorbed by the structure.
The ventilation air cannot remove heat from the building during the day unless the
Abroad definition of comfort 75
building is hotter inside than outside, and that is against the comfort strategy. Thus the
energy has to be coupled to the thermal capacity of the building. It’s no good changing
or increasing the thermal capacity of a building if the heat cannot get from the building
into the thermal store. In electrical jargon, the capacity must be coupled to the source.
The heat in the building flows into the walls, floors and ceiling through the surfaces
and the surfaces have a thermal resistance which is not negligible, in fact it is critical.
The ultimate coupling from a room through a surface is 8 W/m2 K -1. The degree of
coupling to an infinite thickness of concrete is 6 W/m2 K-1 taken over a 24 hour period.
Thus it is important to get the surface area up. Tall spaces have a bigger area exposed
to a room than low spaces. Small rooms have more surface area per unit floor area than
large ones. Once there is enough surface area, the next stage is to ensure that the
surfaces are sufficiently heavy to be able to go on absorbing heat for a substantial part
of the day, and that means we should avoid lightweight plasterboard or thin metal
sheeted partitions and use instead dense concrete or block. We should avoid lightweight
false ceilings and think carefully about the floor. Furniture has surfaces and the furniture
is thermally coupled to the room. Once one takes the coupling of the air boundary
layer into account, there is not much point in providing more thermal capacity than 40
or 50 mm of dense concrete facing onto a room. I am not dealing here with the thermal
capacity which enables a basement to maintain a stable temperature with very small
temperature fluctuations providing the heat flows are small over a long period. There
is an issue here about a potential conflict between the requirements for the thermal
capacity and the requirements for acoustic absorption.
Acoustically absorbing surfaces are inherently bad at storing heat. For an office, the
acoustic environment needs some thought. Let us consider privacy. In a noisy cocktail
party the privacy is almost perfect. It is possible to stand opposite somebody with
your nose about 100 mm from their nose and shout at them as loud as you can. They
cannot understand a word of what you say. Nobody can hear anybody else’s
conversation. The reason for this is that the reverberant sound level field in the space
is greater than the noise of a single person’s voice, even when a few centimetres from
the mouth. For an open plan office you want to be able to have a conversation with
another person sitting, say, a metre away so that they can hear your voice but the
general population cannot. That means the reverberant sound level should be comparable
with the direct sound from a person about a metre away. That is a perfectly well
defined noise level, and if there is one person per 10 m2 in an office all talking then it
is perfectly possible to calculate the amount of absorption needed in the space. A
carpet on the floor will probably do, and then that leaves the ceiling as an exposed
dense thermal capacity surface.
I think that deals with the thermal and acoustical problems. We come now to
lighting. In buildings where people work, light tends to represent something like half
76 Fordham
of the CO2 production of the building. The current consensus is that light levels in
buildings should be reduced, and 300 lux is often suggested as a suitable light level. It
is common to observe that buildings with apparently good provision for natural lighting
are lit with electric lights throughout the day during the winter. One might think that
the occupants are being ‘naughty’ and if the lights were properly controlled by automatic
means, then they would be turned off and energy would be saved. Imagine yourself
coming to work in the morning in the winter before dawn. The office is dark, the lights
are on. After a time it gets light outside and natural light is added to the electric light by
which you work. Ideally, the controls would turn the lighting down to maintain a
constant 300 lux light level, thus saving energy. You might be satisfied by this strategy,
but most people enjoy a little more light and leave the lights on. In our office it is not
popular to turn off the lights until the contribution made by the electric light is a small
proportion of the total light available, so on bright sunlit days the lights can be turned
off and the light level reduces from, say, 1500 to 1200 lux. In my view, buildings
should be designed with this in mind so that we really do have generous light. Of
course, this brings two dangers: during the winter the heat loss at night is excessive and
in summer the heat gain from bright sun is also excessive. The Victorians invented
curtains, shutters and blinds to control these disadvantages of windows and I think we
should have insulated blinds or shutters which close at night during the winter and
close when there is excessive heat gain from light during hot summer days. Roller
shutters have the advantage of providing security against intruders.
I have not talked much about mechanical and electrical engineering, because I hope
the future does not lie in that sphere. I can design such installations, but I hope they
will not be required.
References
Humphreys, M. (1965) What causes thermal discomfort? Proceedings of the Workplace

Comfort Forum.
ISO (1994) ISO. 7730: Moderate thermal environments: determination of the PMV and
PPD indices and specifications of the conditions for thermal comfort, Geneva.
International Standards Organisation.
Chapter 7
Stress and the changing nature

of work
Valerie Sutherland and Cary L. Cooper
One consistently emerging theme identified with organisational life in the 1990s is that of
constant change, and it is likely that this trend will continue into the next millennium. In
addition to predictable life event changes, we face endless modification to our work structure
and climate, much of which is fuelled by rapid technological development. Many have raised
concerns about the impact of such change on productivity, performance and quality of life.
As Richard Hooker (1554–1600) said, ‘change is not made without inconvenience, even
from worse to better’. The implication is that exposure to change is, in some way, costly to
the individual, business and society. Informed organisations are only just beginning to
understand the real costs and acknowledge the notion of ‘healthy workforce – healthy
organisation’. Thus, is it necessary to understand the relationship between ‘change’ as a
source of stress and our responses to it in both physiological and behavioural terms. However,
if change is inevitable, dysfunction and/or distress is not, since it is mismanagement of the
change process that is damaging in its consequences. Identification of sources of stress or
pressure by diagnosis of potential problems informs action. This proactive approach helps
to prevent problems and the need to rely on costly, often ineffective, curative strategies for
stress management in the workplace.
Introduction
Research evidence indicates that a wide variety of workplace conditions cause stress, strain
or pressure which is associated with a range of physical and psychological ill-health problems.
Costs to the individual, business and society are well documented, and informed organisations
are only just beginning to understand the real costs of mismanaged stress in terms of business
profitability. It is clear that health, well-being and quality of work life are associated with
performance and productivity, and so understanding stress and pressure at work is vital if
78 Sutherland and Cooper
we wish to create a productive workplace. However, for many people at work the changing
nature of the work environment is a potential source of stress and pressure which must be
managed in a positive way if we are to remain both healthy and productive.
Constant change has been the dominant theme of organisational life in the 1990s, and this
pattern seems likely to sustain as we move into the next millennium. While we endeavour to
meet the demands associated with predictable life event changes, we must continue to face
the endless reshaping of our work structure and climate, embedded in the changing nature of
society. Change, it is said, brings progress, improvement to our quality of life, stimulation
and variety which relieves us from boredom. Indeed, why would we wish to make changes
for the worse? So, why express concerns about the concept of ‘change’ and use it within the
same sentence as the word ‘stress’? Therefore, our first objective is to raise awareness about
the concept of ‘change’ as a stressor and the notion that it is mismanaged stress which is
damaging in its consequences and costly to the individual, business and society. Next, by
considering some of the changes that seem to be ongoing in contemporary work environments
we can begin to identify the options available for the effective management of stress which
could minimise or eliminate problems that lead to poor productivity and reduced levels of
well-being and unhappiness. First, we address the notion that ‘change’ is a potent source of
stress.
‘Change’ as a source of stress
For many the work environment has become a world of rapid discontinuous change, requiring
us to live in a state of transience and impermanence. This situation is potentially damaging
because energy is expended by constant adaptation to stimulation from the external
environment. Thus, change is a powerful stressor because it necessitates adaptation: whether
it is a negative or positive experience, welcomed, feared or resisted, this adaptation or
adjustment requires energy (Selye, 1956). Our energy resources are not infinite, and so
breakdown of the system, in part or total, will ultimately occur. In Selye’s view, impairment
of function and structural change are wholly or partly linked to adaptation to stimulation
(i.e. arousal). Exposure to a continued state of arousal results in wear and tear on the body
which in the extreme results in exhaustion, collapse and finally death of the system. If we
accept this theory we can concur with Hans Selye’s hypothesis that the only person
without stress (i.e. arousal) is a dead person. In Selye’s terms, stress should be viewed as,
‘stimulation to growth and development . . . challenge and variety . . . the spice of life’, and
so it is any stimulus, event or demand impacting on the sensory nervous system. When our
perceived ability to meet a demand exceeds our perceived ability to cope with that demand,
the resulting imbalance is acknowledged as a state of stress (that is, we experience unwanted
pressure, a lack of control and/or an inability to cope). Stress, therefore, is a subjective
Stress and the changing nature of work 79
experience and is ‘in the eye of the beholder’. This explains why in a given situation one
person will be highly distressed, yet another seems to prosper and thrive.
All too often we try to cope with the demands of exposure to change by resorting to
maladaptive ways of coping. We drink alcohol because we believe it gives us confidence or
helps us to sleep or relax; we drink lots of strong coffee to gain the ‘buzz’ necessary to
sustain long hours of working without a break; we smoke cigarettes to calm our nerves; we
use various pills and potions to ensure sleep, or ‘pep’ ourselves up; or we eat ‘comfort’
foods, particularly sugars and fats with low or poor nutritional value. These forms of coping
render us less fit to cope with the demands of change and in the long term actually become a
source of stress when the addiction exacerbates the problem.
In evolutionary terms the stress response was adaptive and vital for survival because
various bodily functions/mechanisms were activated in order to prepare the body to respond
by either fighting or fleeing from a threat/ source of stress. We are physiologically primed to
take some form of action which is now denied us in contemporary society, particularly for
those in sedentary occupations, because we are not able to release our aggressions by
punching someone on the nose when the pressures become intolerable, but neither can we
run away from the situation. Societal pressures and job role demands require us to stay and
cope without showing sign of weakness. Although we develop some resistance to stress, the
energy needed for adaptation becomes depleted if we remain in stressful circumstances for
an extended period of time. We cannot maintain a state of resistance indefinitely, because
biological activity causes wear and tear on the body which leads to various forms of illness/
diseases, and/or weakens our resistance to disease.
Counting the cost of mismanaged stress
Response to stress is not only in physical terms: we can experience psychological, emotional
or behavioural reactions. Both directly and indirectly, adaptation to change as a source of
stress has potential negative impact which is costly to the individual, the organisation and
society. This fact is well documented by a surfeit of studies and illustrates that the effective
management of stress in the workplace has tremendous potential benefits, in both humanistic
and monetary terms. The costs of mismanaged stress can be high as a result of:
• ill-health – coronary heart disease; certain cancers; mental illness and a wide range
of minor health problems including migraine, headache, stomach ulcers, hay fever,
skin rashes, insomnia, panic attacks, feeling anxious or depressed, irritability, poor
concentration, impotence and menstruation problems
• premature death
• forced early retirement
• sickness absence
• high labour-turnover
• poor performance and productivity
• ineffective managerial or supervisory style
• unsatisfactory employee relations
• low levels of motivation
• job and life dissatisfaction
• poor safety performance
• accident vulnerability (at work and/or while driving)
• delayed recovery from illness or accident
• poor health behaviours – e.g. alcohol, drug abuse problems/lack of exercise/dietary
problems
• marital/relationship problems
• lack of self-esteem
• increased insurance premiums
• stress litigation.
The workplace – change and more change!
‘Change is here to stay’ is an old adage whose truth permeates all our lives (Cooper et al.,
1988) and it would seem that exposure to change can result in adverse and costly outcomes.
In this section we will consider the nature of workplace changes and some of the strategies
available to minimise the costs of exposure to change which is inevitable. These will be
considered under the following headings: changes in the nature of the job; the job role;
relationships at work; the concept of ‘career’; and the ‘organisational structure and climate’.
Changes in the job itself
A key change for many of us in ‘volume of workload’ and ‘demand’ means having too much
rather than too little work to do (although both are potential stressors). Aided by rapid
technological development, many organisations have ‘streamlined, downsized, or rightsized’
in order to continue to meet increasing competition from home and foreign markets. Therefore,
fewer people are doing more and more work. Heavy volume of work, time pressures,
difficult and demanding deadline pressures and lack of, or uneven distribution of, resources
are some of the acknowledged pressures. A recent Institute of Management Services survey
found that 47 per cent of a sample of 1,100 managers reported that their workload had
increased greatly in the past year (1995–1996); nearly six in ten respondents claimed that
they always work in excess of their official working week, while one in seven always work
at weekends. Only half of the respondents looked forward to going to work, and 65 per cent
felt that their professional and personal lives were not in balance. Unreasonable deadlines
and office politics were identified as key sources of pressure.
Rapid development in technology was originally thought to be stressful because it was
associated with deskilling of jobs. These fears seem to be unfounded (Lindstrom, 1991), and
it would appear that the method of introduction of the new technology is more important as
a potential source of pressure (Daus, 1991). Continual development of computer systems
leads to constant changes, requiring retraining. The ‘leaner’ workforce experiences the pressures
associated with trying to release colleagues for training in addition to time off needed for
holidays and during periods of sickness absence, while trying to maintain performance and
production demands. The workforce is required to become multi-skilled so that maximum
use is made of the costly investment in new technology (plant and equipment), and the use
of new technology often results in pushing responsibility for decision-making lower down
the organisation.
Computer-led tasks are likely to be monitored, for example, in terms of number of key
strokes, error rate or task completion rate, causing the worker to experience increased control
and lack of discretion in the job. Lack of autonomy and discretion in a high-demand work
condition defines a job as a ‘strain’ job, according to Karasek (1979), and is associated with
reduced psychological and physical well-being. Thus, increasing the level of job control one
has would be one way of minimising the impact of a high level of demand in a job.
In addition to the pressures of adapting to the changes associated with increased volume
of work, the introduction of new technology and lack of job control, hours of working and
patterns of employment are also altering. The global restructuring of production and the
resulting shift of focus from manufacturing industries to the services sector and recessionary
climates have caused the loss of jobs for many, and job insecurity for those who have
remained in employment. Advent of the ‘contingent worker’ has led to changes in the nature
of employment and the associated strains and pressures for individuals directly and indirectly
employed (i.e. the differences that exist between ‘core’ and ‘periphery’ workers).
Organisations now ‘contract-out’ many services, and staff are given fixed-term contracts.
Jean Hartley (1995) provides a comprehensive account of this, but the following offers a
flavour of the changes.
• Part-time employees made up 15.5 per cent of the workforce in 1971; this increased
to 26 per cent by 1991 and is estimated at 32.3 per cent by the year 2001 (TUC,
1994). Many organisations now refer to these employees as ‘key-time’ workers
rather than ‘part-time’, in order to signify the importance of this form of employment to their
businesses (Hartley, 1995).
• In 1994 there were 157,000 temporary employees in the UK, and this represented a 10
per cent increase over the previous year.
• Women are more likely to occupy part-time jobs than men, and ultimately are more
likely to be employed than men if the trend towards parttime working
continues.
• Legislative changes have decreased the influence and scope of trade unions and
membership has declined; since women are less likely than men to join trade unions, this decline
will continue if action is not taken to rectify the problem.
Contingent employment, suggests Christensen (1995), is a cost framework in which the

worker is perceived as a commodity rather than an investment. As such it creates a divided
workforce where one group is perceived as a cost while the other, ‘core’ worker group is seen
as ‘the investment’.
Such changes described as intrinsic to the job will combine with existing pressures, which
means that many of us will remain in a high state of arousal for much of the working day
without any natural release of the normally protective ‘fight’ or ‘flight’ responses against
exposure to stress. Since many also have sedentary jobs which require us to expend very
little physical energy, and those in full-time employment are working very long hours, it is
unlikely they will engage in physical activities outside work because they have no time, feel
burned-out, psychologically exhausted, and/or depressed or anxious because they are not
coping. Therefore, the problem becomes compounded and the vicious downward spiral of
stress begins.
The changing nature of the job role
Changes to role structure are common as companies continually re-invent themselves, and
change is often stressful because we try to resist it. The impact of change can cause role
ambiguity (lack of clarity about the task) or role conflict (for example, coping with the
conflicting demands of quantity versus quality, or safety versus quantity). Role ambiguity
has been associated with tension and fatigue, leaving the job, high levels of anxiety, physical
and psychological strain, and absenteeism (Breaugh, 1981). Role conflict has been associated
with absenteeism (Breaugh, 1981), job dissatisfaction, abnormal blood chemistry and elevated
blood pressure (Ivancevich and Matteson, 1980).
A situation is exacerbated if the workforce perceives lack of managerial and supervisory
support in the workplace. Significant downsizing of the workforce also affects management-
grade personnel and so they are experiencing high workload demands, long hours of working,
and the realisation that they might not be available when needed. Feeling unable to fulfil
others’ expectations of one’s job role is now a commonly cited source of pressure experienced
by personnel with responsibility for other people. Since it is commercially essential to run
a business continuously, it is also necessary to work a shift system. Managerial staff still
mainly work day-shifts, with only a skeleton staff available for night-shift duties, and this
compounds the problems associated with lack of availability of one’s supervisor/manager
when needed.
Change in the nature of our relationships at work
A recessionary climate which is characterised by job insecurity and the use of contingent
workers is likely to lead to divisiveness, rivalry, unhealthy competition for jobs and poor
interpersonal relations at work. These are defined as having low trust and low supportiveness.
Mistrust is positively related to high role ambiguity, inadequate interpersonal communication
between individuals, and psychological strain in the form of low job satisfaction and decreased
well-being (French and Caplan, 1972). Indeed, levels of violence in the workplace appear to
be on the increase, thus creating another dimension to stress in the workplace, and this
includes violence between staff, towards staff and to the managers and supervisors themselves.
As Sartre said, ‘hell is other people’, and having to live and work with others can be one of
the most stressful aspects of life. However, computerisation has taken over many jobs, and
individuals often work in relative isolation for many hours at a time, with limited opportunities
to socialise. Communication channels are limited and opportunities to develop strong social
support networks are denied if the employee is restricted to a workstation base. Although
CCTV and video-phone links for isolated employees may help to overcome such problems,
a fear that ‘Big Brother is watching’ pervades, and is sustained in, a climate of insecurity and
distrust.
Changes in the concept of ‘career’
In addition to the pressures associated with starting, developing and maintaining a career, a
mismatch in expectations, feeling undervalued and frustration in attaining a sense of
achievement are common ‘career’ stressors. As the pyramid shape of the organisational
structure typically becomes flatter and many job levels are removed, this ‘flatter’ structure
provides fewer opportunities for career progression. This, and job insecurity which results
from downsizing and the increased use of a contingent workforce, are potent sources of
stress, leading to the observation that perhaps the nature of ‘career’ is undergoing a radical
transformation. Disruptive behaviours, poor morale and poor quality of interpersonal
relationships are associated with the stress of perceived disparity between actual status
within the organisation and expectations, while threat of job loss is a potent source of stress
linked to several serious health problems, including ulcers, colitis, alopecia and increased
muscular and emotional complaints. Since contemporary employment relations are in
transition, the demise of loyalty and the need for employees to take care of themselves are
viewed as a sign of the times (Hirsch, 1989), thus it might be said that the nature of ‘career’
is changing.
Changes to the organisational structure and climate
Threats to freedom, autonomy and decision-making imposed by the organisational structure

and climate, and the way the organisation treats its people, are potential sources of stress.
Lack of participation in decision-making processes, lack of effective consultation and
communication, and unjustified restrictions on behaviour have been referred to above, and
are associated with negative psychological mood, escapist drinking and heavy smoking.
Buck (1972) found that managers and workers who felt ‘most under pressure’ reported that
their supervisor always ‘ruled with an iron hand’ and rarely allowed participation in decision-
making or trying out new ideas. Increased control and opportunity to participate has benefits
in terms of improved performance, lower staff turnover, and improved levels of mental and
physical well-being and accident reduction (Sutherland and Cooper, 1991). However,
employees will often resist the offer to adopt a more participative style of working, since
they suspect that the proposed changes in working practices to improve productivity and
quality etc. are required to gain better competitive advantage. Levine (1990) suggests that
employee support for a participative work climate is more likely when the industrial relations
system within the organisation is characterised by:
1. the presence of some form of profit/gain-sharing

2. job security
3. ways in place for the development of group cohesiveness
4. guaranteed individual rights.
Many organisations are trying to ‘empower’ their employees, but encounter problems
because they fail to realise that a workforce acclimatised to a dependency culture, where
they are simply told what to do (and are not expected to solve problems and/or make
decisions for themselves), cannot move easily or quickly to a condition of mutual dependence
(i.e. control shared by mutual agreement) or to interdependence, which is characterised by
flexibility, interchange of activities, joint decision-making and sharing of control, and which
is vital for the success of the empowerment process. If management tries to give up control
too quickly, or employees try to escape from being controlled when the authority figure will
not relinquish control, the workforce will become counter-dependent (Cox and Makin,
1994). In these situations there will be a ‘fight-back’, with acts of rebellion such as overtime
bans, wildcat strikes, and works-to-rule. A need to overcome a state of learned helplessness,
low levels of confidence and lack of esteem is important in successfully changing to an
empowerment model of working (McGrath, 1994). This explains why the changes proposed
as ‘stress reducers’ sometimes become more damaging than the original source of strain.
Diagnosing occupational stress
Understanding the nature of stress and thinking positively and proactively about stress
management, rather than taking a defensive, self-blaming stance, means that we must accept
that each of us, at various times during our life, may be vulnerable and will need to know how
to manage actively (Cooper amd Straw, 1998) and positively a potentially stressful situation
without resorting to maladaptive ways of coping (e.g. excessive alcohol and nicotine; drug
dependence; lack of exercise; comfort eating, particularly sugars and fatty foods which have
low/poor nutritional value), which render us less fit to cope with the demand. Indeed,
members of an organisation are unlikely to come forward and deal with potential problems
within an organisation if there is a fear of being identified and labelled as a ‘non-coper’.
Therefore, conducting a risk assessment is the first step towards successful stress management.
A confidential stress audit will:
1. measure sources of stress, stress outcomes (i.e. performance indicators), individual

moderators of the stress response and biographical/job demographics of the
workforce
2. identify predictors of performance and well-being
3. identify staff attitudes to options for the management of stress (Sutherland, 1993).
A variety of techniques and measures are available for this, including interviewing, focus
group sessions, questionnaire administration (including standardised measures such as the
Occupational Stress Indicator), and medical examinations. Analysis of the results could
identify differences, for example, between departments, job grades, gender, age, length of
service, location, etc. Audit benefits include the following.
1. It is a proactive rather than a reactive approach to managing stress at work.

2. It can identify organisational and individual strengths and weaknesses (similarly
to an appraisal/training-development needs analysis – and so helps us to target
scarce resources).
3. It can identify the level of stress management required (primary, secondary, tertiary);
this includes guidance in the planning of Organisational Development (OD) strategies.
4. It provides a baseline measure from which to evaluate subsequent interventions.

5. It makes stress a respectable topic for discussion in the workplace.
Options for the management of stress in the

workplace
The contemporary view is that stress management should be tackled at more than one level
if it is to be successful, and both the organisation and the individual should actively be
involved (Burke, 1993). It is suggested that we actively manage stress by:
1. eliminating or minimising the stressor at source

2. helping the individual cope with a source of stress that cannot be changed.
Both ‘preventive’ and ‘curative’ stress management options are available. We must decide
whether we take the problem away, or manage the situation more effectively (i.e. primary
level interventions – stressor-directed); do we need to help improve response to a source of
pressure which can not be removed or minimised (i.e. secondary level interventions – response-
directed); or do we already have problems associated with exposure to stress and a need to
treat victims of mismanaged stress (i.e. tertiary level interventions – symptom-directed)?
(Cooper, Linkkonen and Cartwright, 1996).
Primary level interventions – preventive stress

management strategies
This type of intervention is directed at the source of stress. Job and task re-design, and
changes to the macro environment are part of this approach to stress management. Job and/
or task re-design includes more job rotation and job share opportunities so that no-one is
exposed to a high-stress job for any substantial length of time. Career/job development
opportunities are improved when levels of responsibility are increased through horizontal
job enlargement or by ‘vertical loading’. Providing more flexible work patterns can also
eliminate the stress problems of travelling to work and coping with child-care/dependant
demands. Provision of crèche facilities would be placed in this category as a stress management
strategy.
As already noted, lack of worker control is acknowledged as a potent source of pressure,
and increased perceptions of control seem to be important for job satisfaction, health and
well-being. A variety of strategies exist to improve perception of worker control and decision-
making, including building and developing semi-autonomous work groups, quality circles/
groups and/or health circles. Ultimately they aim to re-design any system practice which
induces stress at work and create a better balance between demands and level of worker
control. Other sources of pressure can also be eliminated or reduced by making changes in the
macro environment. This would include an audit of ergonomic factors in the workplace (e.g.
the layout (open plan offices), noise, heat, cold, ventilation levels). Also, examination of the
appropriateness of the organisational structure, climate and culture, safety climate and
management/supervisory style (e.g. identification of ‘stress carriers’!), might usefully identify
sources of stress which could be more positively managed. For example, a supervisor with
a ‘type A behaviour’ style can create a stressful milieu for their subordinates, and an abrasive
manager will create an inordinately stressful work environment for staff. (Type A behaviour
predisposes one to a stress-related illness; it is shown by someone who is rushed, impatient,
time-conscious, overly competitive and aggressive in his or her relationships.)
Secondary level interventions – preventive stress

This type of programme is ‘response-directed’ since it improves the response to a source of

pressure in order to avoid a negative outcome; it thus operates at the level of ‘the individual
employee’ or ‘work group’ and includes a variety of skills training options, usually following
an assessment-focused stress management programme (i.e. a training needs analysis). For
example:
• assertiveness training – being able to negotiate or ultimately say ‘no’ without

becoming aggressive or non-assertive is a useful stress management technique
• improved coping skills – understanding adaptive coping rather than using the
maladaptive styles of coping which ultimately render us less fit to cope with
pressure
• interpersonal/social skills training
• leadership skills training
• time management skills
• cognitive reappraisal of the situation, which aims to improve the balance between
perception of ‘demand’ and our ability to cope with it (e.g. by examining faulty
thinking)
• relaxation training/biofeedback
• type A coronary prone behaviour management.
Other options in this category aim to keep the individual fit to cope with the pressures of
work and living, and many organisations already have this type of wellness programme in
place. For example:
• exercise/keep fit programmes

• healthy lifestyle management
• dietary advice
• smoking/alcohol cessation programmes
• advisory clinics on drugs.
Tertiary level interventions – curative stress

At a tertiary level it is possible to provide stress management options for individuals who
are suffering from the effects of exposure to strain and pressure. Many of the strategies
described above take time to implement, and so it will be necessary to have in place some
form of programme to catch the people who ‘fall through the net’ and become victims of
exposure to stress. These include:
• provision of an employee assistance programme (EAP), i.e. access to a confidential

telephone/counselling service for employees – this can also play a ‘preventive’ part in
a stress management programme if the EAP company provides anonymous feedback
about the types of stress involved, so that the organisation can implement a ‘preventive’
programme where possible
• internal/external psychological counselling services
• opportunities for a career sabbatical (can also be a ‘preventive’ strategy if implemented
before the individual becomes a casualty of exposure to stress)
• development social support networks – social support can play a significant part in
enhancing the level of employee well-being, particularly social support from a boss;
self-managed work teams, action groups, etc. play a part in developing social support
networks, particularly for employees who work in relative isolation in a computer-led
work environment.
Conclusions
Some degree of pressure is an inevitable part of living in a constantly changing work

environment. While this can be a spur to improved performance and motivation to respond,
it can also be damaging in its consequences if it is mismanaged. Change is inevitable but
distress is not, because many options are available for the management of stress. While the
concept of ‘healthy individual – healthy organisation’ is not enshrined in legislation, common

law and the general duties under Section 2 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 require
employers to ensure the health, safety and welfare at work of their employees as far as
reasonably practicable. Thus, in recent years the practice of introducing stress management
interventions has steadily grown. However, most of these have been aimed at the individual,
either by treating people who have become victims of exposure to stressful conditions, with
the aim of getting them fit to deal with stress, or by helping them to cope more effectively
with the demands and strains of organisational life. Research evidence indicates that these
strategies alone will not be totally effective, and organisations must begin to identify negative
occupational stress and work to remove or minimise these problems. A stress audit (also
recognised as a psychological risk assessment) is required to identify sources of stress and
inform action. Recent audits show a clear role for those involved in the design and planning
of productive work environments. In this way they can contribute to a proactive organisational
approach to stress management which aims to prevent problems and the need to rely on
costly, often ineffective curative strategies that are currently used to keep people healthy,
happy and productive at work. Indeed, effective stress management will put you in control
of change, which will be an inevitable part of working and living in the twenty-first century.
References
Breaugh, J.A. (1981) Predicting absenteeism from prior absenteeism and work attitudes. J. Appl.
Psychol., 36, 1–18.
Buck, V.E. (1972) Working Under Pressure. New York: Crane, Russak.
Burke, R.J. (1993) Organizational-level interventions to reduce occupational stress. Work and
Stress, 7, 77–87.
Christensen, K. (1995) Contingent Work Arrangements in Family-sensitive Corporations. Boston,
MA: The Work and Family Institute, Boston University.
Cooper, C.L., Cooper, R.D. and Eaker, L.H. (1988) Living with Stress. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Cooper, C.L., Linkkonen, P. and Cartwright, S. (1996) Stress Prevention in the Workforce.
Dublin: European Foundation of Living and Working Conditions.
Cox, C.J. and Makin, P.J. (1994) Overcoming dependence with contingency contracting.
Leadership Org. Dev. J., 15(5), 21–26.
Cooper, C.L. and Straw, A. (1998) Successful Stress Management, London: Hodder and Stoughton.
Daus, D. (1991) Technology and the organization of work, in A. Howard (ed.), The Changing
Nature of Work. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
French, J.P.R. and Caplan, R.D. (1972) Organizational stress and individual strain, in A.J.
Marrow (ed.) The Failure of Success, 30–66. New York: AMA Committee.
Hartley, J. (1995) Challenge and change in employment relations: Issues for psychology, trade
unions and managers, in Lois E. Tetrick and Julian Barling (eds), Changing Employment
Relations: Behavioural and Social Perspectives, 3–30. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Hirsch, P. (1989) Pack your Own Parachute. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Ivancevich, J.M. and Matteson, M.T. (1980) Stress and Work. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.
Karasek, R.A. (1979) Job demands, job decision latitude and mental strain. Implications for job
redesign. Admin. Sci. Q., 24, 285–306.
Levine, D.I. (1990) Participation, productivity and the firm’s environment. California Man.
Rev., 32(4) 86–100.
Lindstrom, K. (1991) Well-being and computer-mediated work of various occupational groups
in banking and insurance. Int. J. Comput. Interaction, 3(4) 339–361.
McGrath, R., Jr (1994) Organizationally induced helplessness: The antithesis of empowerment.
Qual. Prog., 27(4), 89–92.
Selye, H. (1956) The Stress of Life. New York: McGraw Hill.
Sutherland, V.J. (1993) The use of a stress audit. Leadership Org. Dev., 14(1) 22–28.
Sutherland, V.J. and Cooper, C.L. (1990) Understanding Stress: A Psychological Perspective for
Health Professionals. London: Chapman and Hall.
Sutherland, V.J. and Cooper, C.L. (1991) Stress and Accidents in the Offshore Oil and Gas
Industry. Houston, TX: Gulf Publishing.
Sutherland, V.J. and Cooper, C.L. (1994) Stress in the work environment, in Human Stress and
the Environment, J. Rose (ed.) 131–160. Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers.
Part 2
The economic case for

productivity
Chapter 8
The economics of enhanced

environmental services in
buildings
David H. Mudarri
The theme of this chapter is that the great disparity between the economic loss society
suffers from poor indoor environmental quality and the cost necessary to improve it is
caused in large measure by an imbalance in the marketplace. Private entities that want
improved environments have been unable to translate this desire into an overt expression of
market demand that would justify the expenditure and risk that the improvements require.
Public policies which facilitate the easy expression of market demand by occupants and
which ease the response to that demand by building owners and developers are recommended.
These policies include the establishment of protocols of good building practices; a rational
integration of energy and indoor environmental policies; and guidance and software packages
for building owners and others that assist in calculating bottom-line impacts of indoor
environmental quality projects.
Magnitude of economic loss associated with poor

indoor environments
While economic loss from poor indoor environments has not been rigorously studied, there
is good evidence that the economic loss to industrialised nations is substantial. The United
States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA, 1989) estimated a total annual cost of
indoor air pollution in the USA of approximately $6 billion due to cancer and heart disease,1
and approximately $60 billion due to reductions in productivity. The productivity loss was
derived from self-reported survey data and represents an average productivity loss of
approximately 3 per cent for all white-collar workers, or approximately twice that figure for
just those workers reporting some loss.
Raw et al. (1990) looked at self-reported productivity loss in buildings in the United
Kingdom. From their data it appears that about half of the office workers in the UK
experience fewer than three indoor air quality symptoms, with little or no reported
94 Mudarri
productivity loss, but that the remaining workers report productivity losses of about 7 per
cent on average, or just over 3 per cent when considering all workers.
These estimates are based on self-assessments of productivity losses, and therefore
must be interpreted with caution. But other evidence, including experimental evidence,
supports the overall conclusion that the productivity losses are large (Wyon, 1996; Kroner
et al., 1992).
Mudarri (1994) estimated the costs and benefits of a proposed national ban on smoking
in public buildings. The portion of the estimate of benefits over costs associated with the
reduced impact of second-hand smoke on non-smokers was in the range of $30–$60 billion
per year,2 while the portion associated with reduced building housekeeping and maintenance
was in the $4–$8 billion range.
Fisk and Rosenfeld (1997) estimated that annual savings and productivity gains from
building improvements in the USA could be $6–$9 billion from reduced respiratory diseases,
$1–$4 billion from reduced asthma, $10–$20 billion from reduced sick building syndrome,
and $12 to $125 billion for improved worker performance that is unrelated to health.
Example calculations also suggest that the value of the benefits from improvements might
be between 18 and 47 times the cost of those improvements. And Dorgan Associates
(1993) estimated that a productivity gain worth $55 billion annually could be achieved
with an $88.6 billion initial investment (payback of 1.6 years) with an annual cost of $4.8
billion to sustain the improvements.
While these estimates differ in their detail, and while it is admittedly difficult to quantify
national costs and benefits, all these studies are consistent in their implication that even
modest improvements in the quality of environments inside buildings would result in an
extraordinarily large social benefit. So it is worth while discussing why there is a problem,
and what can be done about it.
Problems with the market for indoor environmental

quality
With such apparent large net economic gains to be derived from improved building practices,
why doesn’t the private sector simply jump at the opportunity? Perhaps from the
standpoint of the building owner or company executive, such changes would not be as
profitable as the economic analysis above suggests. Or perhaps they could be profitable
but would require some changes in old patterns of behaviour.
Indoor environmental quality is seldom a meaningful consideration in the most
fundamental building market transactions – the sale and purchase of design and construction
services, the sale and purchase of the building, the leasing of rental space, or the operation
and maintenance of buildings. In part, this is because the market entity which benefits from
improved indoor environmental quality (e.g. the tenant/occupant) is not the entity capable
Enhanced environmental services 95
of providing it, or that must pay for it (e.g. the building owner). While it is true that this
creates a barrier to having the latter respond to the former’s desires, it should not prevent
a response. After all, competitive markets are supposed to ensure that the desires of those
that purchase or rent space is satisfied by those supplying space, as long as they are
willing to pay for it. The fundamental problem here is that those who want and are willing
to pay for improved indoor environmental quality (e.g. building tenants) are not asking for
it during the market transaction (e.g. rental of space), so that those capable of providing
improvements (e.g. building owners) are not motivated to do so.3 The desire for improved
environments has not been translated into a market demand, even though there is ample
evidence that the desire exists.
Tables 8.1 and 8.2 suggest that the desire for improved indoor environments is widespread.
Two independent surveys of major building tenants place indoor air quality and the related
issues of thermal comfort and HVAC performance high on the list of major tenant complaints.
Despite this, when it comes to seeking available space, these issues are rarely raised.
Tenants look for, and owners market their space according to its location, its appearance,
parking, and other items that are visible and tangible. Such measures as continuous and
adequate outdoor air flow, HVAC operational parameters, the housekeeping and maintenance
programme, or other factors that directly affect indoor environmental quality, but are not
visible or tangible, rarely become major considerations in seeking space or in negotiating
the rental agreement. If such demand is not expressed in the purchase and sale for space, it
will not trickle up into either the design and construction, or the sale and purchase of
buildings.
Table 8.1 BOMAI survey: office tenant moves and changes

(BOMAI, 1988)
Worst problem % of responses
HVAC and indoor air quality 30

Elevators 12
Building design 7
Loading docks 6
All other 45
Table 8.2 IFMA survey: top five

complaints of corporate tenants
(IFMA, 1991)
1. Too hot
2. Too cold
3. Storage and filing space
4. Indoor air quality (tie)
5. Janitorial service (tie)
96 Mudarri
Thus, the cost-conscious developer or building owner has every motivation to

avoid expenditures that might improve the indoor environment. Commissioning new
building construction to ensure that building systems are designed, integrated, and
installed correctly is an expense; writing operation and maintenance manuals to instruct
the building engineer how to operate and maintain the systems is an expense; and
actually performing adequate maintenance once the building is constructed is an expense.
For items such as these, for which there is no discernible market demand, the operating
phrase is often ‘make sure you meet code, but do no more’. These expenses are
avoided. It is not surprising, therefore, that many indoor environmental problems are
traced to faulty design, faulty construction, or faulty operating and maintenance
procedures. 4
The lack of expressed market demand for improved indoor environmental quality
creates an enormous chasm between those that would benefit and those responsible
for providing it. For example, in addition to inadequate maintenance, attempts to
reduce energy costs can also create indoor air quality problems if they unduly reduce
outdoor ventilation rates, or if they unduly relax the ability of the ventilation system
to control temperature and humidity to suit occupant needs. But the savings resulting
from reduced maintenance or from energy conservation strategies are insignificant
when compared to the potential health, comfort, and productivity losses of the
occupants. Consider, for example, the relative value of building costs (Table 8.3).
Labour costs are clearly the most significant cost item in most commercial buildings. A
30 per cent saving in HVAC energy and/or in HVAC maintenance translates into
something of the order of $0.25–$0.35 per square foot. However, the 3 per cent loss in
productivity associated with poor environmental quality would correspond to
approximately $4.50–$6.00 per square foot, with unmeasured additional impacts of
discomfort and poor health. From a holistic view this makes no sense – society is
sacrificing values of over $4.50–$6.00 to gain values of $0.25–$0.35.
Tenants and occupants ought not to tolerate such gross suffering for such
Table 8.3 Some typical office building expenses
Item $/square foot
Rental income 10.00–20.00

Operating expenses
HVAC energy 0.75–1.00
HVAC maintenance 0.30–0.50
Cleaning 0.75–1.00
Grounds 0.30–0.60
Leasing 0.20–1.75
Tenant expenses
Employees 150.00–200.00
minuscule savings, but tolerate it they must unless they know specifically what changes to
ask for. And building owners who want to advertise the environmental quality of their
building need to know specifically how to achieve it and get credit in the marketplace for
doing so.
Public policy remedies
Translating the notion of good indoor environmental quality into specific generally accepted
protocols would go a long way to enable the expression of market demand. Combined with
specific provisions to reduce costs and risks, the market for indoor environmental quality
could very well become healthy, active and robust.
Indoor environmental quality protocols
Indoor environmental quality does not come in a can or a box, and you cannot order it by the
ton or by the gallon. It has no clear definition or metric. Rather, it is wrapped into the fabric
of the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the building in hundreds of
different ways. To make it a marketable product, it first needs to be packaged in an identifiable
way, as, for example, through the development of specific protocols or standards of practice
for the design, construction, operation and maintenance of buildings. Fortunately, much has
been learned over the past 15 years and there has been significant progress in developing
elements of these protocols in the form of guidelines and standards for indoor air quality,
ventilation, and green buildings and products. While this process has been slow and is still in
its infancy, there are signs that some groups are packaging elements of these protocols into
specific design or operation and maintenance services with the idea of marketing these
services to building owners. The gamble is that the ‘unexpressed market demand’ for good
indoor environmental quality will be recognised by some building owners who will use the
certification associated with these services to gain a market advantage. As a matter of public
policy, encouraging, supporting, and participating in the accelerated development of
these protocols is surely an important thing to do.
Rationalising indoor environmental policies with energy

policies in buildings
Since ventilation is so critical to indoor air quality, and since the energy cost associated with
ventilation systems is an important building operating cost, a set of procedures which
integrates the needs for energy cost reduction with the needs for good indoor environmental
quality ought to be adopted and codified. The attitudes which pit indoor environmental
98 Mudarri
quality interests against interests in energy efficiency are wasteful and unnecessary. This is
why, for example, the US Environmental Protection Agency’s comment on the proposed
revision to ASHRAE Standard 62 encouraged ASHRAE to focus more on improving energy
recovery technologies to reduce the cost of outdoor air rather than attempting to limit
outdoor air in buildings unreasonably.
In addition, the professional literature is beginning to explore objectively issues of
compatibility and conflict between indoor environmental quality and energy efficiency
(Coad, 1996; Eto and Meyer, 1988; Eto, 1990; Lizardos, 1994; Mudarri et al., 1996a, 1996b;
Mutammara and Hittle, 1990; Reddy et al., 1996; Rengarajan et al., 1996; Shirley and
Rengarajan, 1996; Steele and Brown, 1990). This is a necessary first step in the formation of
a rational integrated policy. Based on current knowledge, an integrated energy and indoor air
quality protocol might include the items identified in Table 8.4.
To evaluate the potential savings from energy measures which compromise indoor air
quality (see Table 8.4) relative to other energy-saving options, an office building in a moderate
climate is being modelled using the DOE-2 energy simulation program. This modelling is an
extension of previous work (Mudarri et al., 1996a, 1996b). Preliminary results suggest that
the energy-saving actions which compromise indoor air quality are not significant when
compared to the very significant savings attributable to basic load reductions and equipment
efficiencies. This gives impetus to the hope that an integrated energy/indoor air quality
protocol can be widely accepted. It is appropriate, therefore, that the US Department of
Energy and the US Environmental Protection Agency have begun a project to develop such
a protocol. It is being developed in conjunction with a wide variety of other stakeholders as
an indoor environmental quality appendix to the International Performance and Verification
Protocol (IPMVP) – a protocol for the measurement and verification of building energy
improvements.5
Reducing the cost burden to building owners
Two notable developments in the energy field have been the concepts of ‘demand side
management’ and ‘performance contracting’. Demand side management reflects the utility
industry’s awareness that it is more cost-effective in the long run to answer the growing
demand for energy by promoting energy efficiency than by building additional power plant
capacity. This response has resulted in the utility industry offering building owners and
others financial incentives or discounts in purchasing energy-efficient equipment. Performance
contracting provides the mechanism by which energy savings from energy-efficient investment
can be used to pay for its financing. In such an arrangement, an energy service company
(ESCO) may contract with the building owner to evaluate energy savings opportunities, to
implement them, and to arrange for financing. The energy savings are then directed towards
Table 8.4 Proposed elements of an integrated building environment and energy policy
Measures to improve energy with little impact on indoor air quality (IAQ):
should be pursued on the basis of energy potential alone
• shell efficiencies
• internal load reductions (e.g. lighting, computers)
• air distribution upgrades (fans, fan motors and drives)
• central plant upgrades (chillers and boilers)
• energy recovery systems
Measures to improve IAQ with little energy impact: should be pursued as a

matter of good building practice where practical
• choice of materials, furnishings, cleaning products
• timing and method of major pollutant source applications (e.g. painting, pesticides)
• filter changing
• trash storage and collection
• pressurisation controls for garage entrances, loading dock entrances, print rooms
• smoking restrictions
Measures to improve energy and IAQ: should be pursued as a matter of good

building practice where practical
• economiser HVAC control
• night precooling/night-time flush
• preventive maintenance
• cleaning and disinfecting HVAC equipment
• calibration of thermostats and controls, reduced duct leakage
• exhausting pollution/heat-generating equipment (e.g. copying rooms)
Energy efficiency measures that may compromise IAQ: should be avoided or

carefully adjusted to ensure a healthy, comfortable, and productive
environment
• decreasing outdoor air below IAQ standards
• VAV systems using a fixed outdoor air damper
• aggressive equipment downsizing unless based on year-round outdoor air and
thermal control
• late start-up and premature shutdown of HVAC
• overly wide temperature/humidity control deadband to save energy
financing the project, paying the ESCO, and reducing the operating costs for the owner. The
exact way in which the energy savings are proportioned will vary. One objective of the
IPMVP is to facilitate these arrangements by standardising measurement and verification
procedures.
These arrangements offer an opportunity to institutionalise indoor environmental quality
into market transactions involving building construction or retrofit. Many indoor air quality
improvement projects require that the HVAC system be upgraded. In itself, this is a substantial
expense and a great disincentive to cost-conscious building owners. However, new HVAC
equipment offers opportunities for energy upgrades. Thus, the opportunities to reduce
100 Mudarri
costs and risks by packaging these retrofits into an overall energy upgrade programme while
using performance contracting and utility incentives to reduce costs can go a long way to
removing this disincentive and potentially creating a positive incentive for long-term financial
gain.
A large number of indoor air quality problems could be avoided if building owners would
simply maintain their HVAC system in order to ensure that the system operates according
to its design intent (USEPA/NIOSH, 1991). This may also result in significant energy
savings. In a study of seven existing buildings in Minnesota, easily achieved energy saving
opportunities consistent with the operating intent of the building owner were estimated to
account for 8–21 per cent of the buildings’ utility cost with an average payback of only 0.67
years (Herzog and LaVine, 1992). Considering just those aspects associated with the HVAC
system, savings would be of the order of 2–20 per cent with an average of 10 per cent savings
in energy costs.6 This is why ‘HVAC tune-up’ is recognised as an important element of both
an energy conservation and an indoor air quality programmme for commercial buildings
(USEPA/NIOSH, 1991; USEPA, 1995).
Housekeeping is an important operating expense, perhaps equivalent to the HVAC energy
budget. Not only is good housekeeping important to maintaining good indoor environmental
quality (USEPA/NIOSH, 1991; Franke et al., 1997), but a reasonable pollutant source
management programme, including smoking restrictions, medium efficiency air filtration,
and simple strategies for managing outdoor sources of contaminants (e.g. from the loading
dock and parking garage) can reduce housekeeping costs. Savings in housekeeping from
smoking restrictions alone have been estimated to be of the order of 10 per cent (Mudarri,
1994).
These three ways which reduce the cost of indoor environmental services – energy
savings through HVAC equipment retrofit, energy savings through good maintenance, and
savings in housekeeping expenses – makes indoor environmental quality an issue with
potentially little or no cost burden. If this cost containment strategy were to be combined
with the ability of building owners to market and advertise the environmental quality
of their space, there is a good chance that the building owner’s net revenue potential
would be enhanced.
Bottom line analysis for building owners and managers
Let’s look into the future for a moment, and consider the situation of a typical 200,000
square foot office building located in a temperate climate in the United States. Suppose the
building is reasonably well run, but the owner has been hearing rumblings of dissatisfaction
from one or two tenants about air quality and thermal comfort. The owner believes that his
building is about average in terms of how well it is managed, and he has always had the
impression that there isn’t much more he can do about improving the indoor environment
within his current budget. Then he picks up an article in the trade press that describes a
newly internationally recognised7 energy and indoor environmental protocol, and a new
software package that shows building owners how to improve the energy efficiency and
indoor air quality of a building at modest to negligible cost. He notes that the same software
is available to building tenants. He is interested in this concept, but is also concerned that
potential tenants might become aggressive in negotiating for space if such resources are
available to them.
He obtains a copy. The software convinces him that the concept is viable for his building,
so he hires a new kind of company which may one day come to be known as energy and
environment service companies (EESCOs). This EESCO recommends a series of changes
including a building tune-up, lighting upgrades, increases in outdoor air ventilation, upgrades
to chillers and boilers, improved housekeeping to control outdoor pollutant sources, a non-
smoking policy, and a rigorous HVAC maintenance programme. The EESCO recommends
that this effort be achieved over a three-year period. The expense analysis of the software
programme, based on the EESCO’s recommendations, is reflected in Fig. 8.1. It reflects some
initial expenses to remediate previously deferred maintenance, to tune-up the HVAC system,
revise maintenance procedures, reorganise records, train personnel, and generally start the
programme. He will have some capital expenses for new HVAC equipment and controls,
which provide for basically a 4–5 year payback. The startup expenses and initial capital
outlays are distributed over a three-year period. The capital outlays are financed over a ten-
Figure 8.1 Annual expenses projections with and without energy/IAQ upgrades
102 Mudarri
year period. However, the annual expenses associated with this programme are essentially
paid for by the reduced operating costs. After about 10–12 years, the expenses are effectively
reduced.
The owner now considers his revenues and leasehold expenses. Since the owner has been
hearing rumblings of dissatisfaction from tenants concerning indoor environmental conditions,
he considers the possibility that over the long haul, an improved indoor environment may
convince some tenants to renew their lease rather than seek alternative space. This could be
very advantageous to him. With the same rental rate, retaining a tenant will reduce leasehold
expenses associated with buildout and brokerage fees. It will also allow him to avoid the
delay in occupancy associated with a new tenant, as well as the need to offer free rent to
attract new tenants. He quickly sketches out the difference between renewing the lease of an
existing tenant with this new programme and having to seek a new tenant when the lease
expires under the old programme (Fig. 8.2). This possibility is attractive and suggests some
long-term gains even if just a small portion of his tenants reverse a decision to leave and
decide to renew their lease instead.
Then he considers the potential impact on his 20-year pro forma budget. He loses about
four months in occupancy every time a space turns over. In addition, on average, he is
offering two months free rent for new tenants. He tries to recoup some of this expense with
an increased rental rate for new tenants, but in a tight market, there is a definite trade-off
between months of free rent, the time it takes to attract a new tenant, and the rental rate.
Figure 8.2 Net revenue comparison for a single lease with and without energy
/IAQ upgrades
He anticipates that he will use the upgraded features of the building as a marketing and
negotiating tool. The software package shows him how his effective rents (rental revenue
less leasehold expenses) will change with changes in occupancy and rental rates (Table 8.5).
He estimates that if he undertakes the recommended improvements, his long-run occupancy
rate might improve from its current 97 per cent to 98 per cent as he is better able to retain
tenants. He postulates that, with this strategy, he might be able to increase his average rent
modestly from $19.00 to $19.25 per square foot.
With these inputs, he uses his software package to run a 20 year pro forma budget (Fig.
8.3). The building owner is impressed with the results, and implements the package. He is
modestly successful and decides to do the same with other buildings he owns. He does this
for 20 years and, as he ages and matures, he reflects on how all his competitors are now
doing the same. It’s a matter of survival. Indoor environmental quality has become a
Table 8.5 Changes in effective revenues (i.e. revenues net of leasehold expenses) after
improvements (before improvements: rents = $19/square foot; occupancy = 97%)
Annual rental rate Occupancy rate (%)

(per square foot)
97.0 97.5 98.0
$19.00 0 4 7
$19.50 7 7 10
$20.00 6 10 13
Figure 8.3 Twenty-year net annual summary with and without energy/IAQ upgrades
104 Mudarri
commonly marketed item, with very specific and well-defined parameters, known as
much to occupants and tenants as to building managers, architects and builders.
The term ‘building performance’ no longer just refers to energy performance and
operating costs. It also refers to how well the building services the occupants in the
space with comfortable and healthy conditions that maximise their performance and
productivity. He reflects on how his world has changed from what it used to be, and
he is delighted in the change.
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author, and do not necessarily represent
the policy of the US Environmental Protection Agency.
References
BOMAI (1988) Office Tenant Moves and Changes: Why Tenants Move, What They Want, Where
They Go. Building Owners and Managers Association International, Washington, DC.
Dorgan Associates (1993) Productivity and Indoor Environmental Quality Study. Report prepared
for National Energy Management Institute, Alexandria, VA.
Eto, J. (1990) The HVAC costs of increased fresh air ventilation rates in office buildings, part 2.
Proc. Indoor Air 90: 5th International Conf. on Indoor Air Quality and Environments,
Toronto.
Eto, J. and Meyer, C. (1988) The HVAC costs of fresh air ventilation in office buildings,
ASHRAE Trans., 94(2), 331–345.
Fisk, W.J. and Rosenfeld, A.J. (1997) Estimates of improved productivity and health from better
indoor environments. Indoor Air: Int. J. Indoor Air Quality and Climate, 7(3).
Franke, D.L., Cole, E.C., Leese, K.E., Foarde, K.K. and Berry, M.A. (1997) Indoor Air, 7.
Herzog, P. and LaVine, L. (1992) Identification and quantification of the impact of improper
operation of mid-size Minnesota office buildings on energy use: a seven building case study.
Proc. 1992 Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings, American Council for an
Energy Efficient Economy, Washington, DC.
IFMA (1991) Results of IFMA Corporate Facilities Monitor. IFMA News, International Facility
Management Association, Oct.
Kroner, W., Stark-Martin, J.A. and Willemain, T. (1992) Rensselaer’s West Bend Mutual Study:
Using Advanced Office Technology to Increase Productivity. Renssalaer Polytechnic Institute,
Troy, NY.
Lizardos, E. (1994) IAQ and energy efficiency: guidelines for achieving both. Consulting-
Specifying Eng., Sept., 41.
Mudarri, D. (1994) The Cost and Benefits of Smoking Restrictions: An Assessment of the Smoke-
Free Environment Act of 1993 (H.R. 3434). Report prepared by the Indoor Air Division,
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
Mudarri, D., Hall, J. and Werling, C. (1996a) Energy costs and IAQ performance of ventilation
systems and controls. In IAQ 96. Paths to Better Building Environments. Conference of the
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA.
Mudarri, D., Hall, J., Werling, E. and Meisegeier, D. (1996b) Impacts of increased outdoor air
flow rates on annual HVAC energy costs. Paper presented at the 1996 Conference of the
American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Asilomar, CA.
Mutammara, A. and Hittle, D. (1990) Energy effects of various control strategies for variable
air-volume systems. ASHRAE Trans., 96(1).
Raw, G.J., Roys, M.S. and Leaman, A. (1990) Further findings from the office environment
survey: productivity. Indoor Air 90: The Fifth International Conference on Indoor Air
Quality and Climate, vol. 1, 231.
Reddy, T., Liu, M. and Claridge, D. (1996) Synergism between energy use and indoor air quality
in terminal reheat variable air volume systems. Paper presented at the 1996 Conference of
the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Asilomar, CA.
Rengarajan, K., Shirley, D.B. and Raustad, R.A. (1996) Cost-effective HVAC technologies to
meet ASHRAE Standard 62–1989 in hot and humid climates. ASHRAE Trans., 102(1), 39–
49.
Shirey, D. and Rengarajan, K. (1996) Impacts of ASHRAE Standard 62–1989 on small Florida
offices. ASHRAE Trans., 102(1).
Steele, T. and Brown, M. (1990) Energy and Cost Implications of ASHRAE Standard 62–1989.
Bonnyville Power Administration, May.
USDOE (1993) Commercial Building Characteristics 1991. Energy Information Administration,
Washington, DC.
USEPA (1989) Report to Congress on Indoor Air Quality; Volume II: Assessment and Control of
Indoor Air Pollution. EPA/400/1–89/001C, United States Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC.
USEPA (1995) Energy Star Buildings Manual: A Guide for Implementing the Energy Star
Buildings Program. EPA 430-B-95–007. United States Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC.
USEPA/NIOSH (1991) Building Air Quality: A Guide for Building Owners and Facility Managers.
EPA/400/1–91/023. United States Environmental Protection Agency and United States
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Washington, DC.
Wyon, D. (1996) Indoor Environmental Effects on Productivity. Keynote address at IAQ 96.
Paths to Better Building Environments. Conference of the American Society of Heating,
Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers.
Notes
1. No attempt was made to assess the economic value of premature death due to indoor pollion,
but only the direct medical cost and lost earnings from the major illnesses which could lead to
premature death. The true economic value of society’s loss is thus considerably underestimated
as a result.
2. This estimate was based on a valuation of each premature death avoided using a willingness to
pay measure of $4.8 million.
3. Similarly, in owner-occupied buildings, the managers interested in the health and productivity
of the employees need to ask for improved environmental quality from the managers
responsible for building operations.
106 Mudarri
4. In the USA, in only about half of the commercial buildings is the HVAC system subject to a
regular maintenance programme (USDOE, 1993).
5. Information about the IPMVP protocol and the indoor environmental quality appendix is
available at http://www.ipmvp.org/committee.
6. In effect, this would ordinarily be enough to pay for over half of the cost of a good HVAC
preventive maintenance programme.
7. Such a software package is being developed by the USEPA. For information contact
mudarri.david@epamail.gov.
Chapter 9
Assessment of link between

productivity and indoor air
quality
Charles E. Dorgan and Chad B. Dorgan
An assessment of the health status of all commercial buildings in the United States was made
based on nineteen research reports and related information on indoor air quality projects, and
medical and epidemiology evaluations of existing reports and papers. This information was
used to determine the cost to bring all buildings up to ASHRAE Standard 62-1989 and other
accepted indoor air quality (IAQ) practice. The productivity benefits were determined: both
employee-related productivity benefits and general customer or client benefits. An evaluation
of annual cost to sustain the IAQ measures in buildings was included in the study. The study
determined the ‘healthy building’ status of existing buildings by commercial type and five
US climatic regions. The economic productivity return for bringing all buildings up to our
defined ASHRAE 62-1989 level is recovered in about half a year. However, for a specific
building this can range from weeks to several years. Many buildings in the current inventory
are very close to ASHRAE 62-1989, and these require only a small investment to bring them
up to this level.
Introduction
Due to the large portion of time, up to 95 per cent (ASHRAE, 1993), an average individual
spends indoors, the quality of the indoor environment has a significant effect on the health
and productivity of employees and other occupants and visitors to commercial buildings.
The indoor environmental quality (IEQ) is composed of factors such as space, temperature,
humidity, noise, lighting, interior design and layout, building envelope, and structural systems.
A subset of the IEQ is indoor air quality (IAQ). The factors that define IAQ are temperature,
humidity, room air motion and contaminants.
When IAQ is not satisfactory, both employee and other building occupants’ health can be
impacted, resulting in work degradation and dissatisfaction by customers. This results in a
reduction in productivity. With poor IAQ, employees can suffer significant health and
productivity degradation. Productivity is a measure of the quality/quantity of
108 Dorgan and Doran
accomplishments actually completed by an employee compared to what could be

accomplished under ideal circumstances. Due to the wide variation in tasks in commercial
buildings, productivity can be measured in many ways. It can be a measured value, such as
sales, profits, the number of errors per hour or actual time at work. It can be a subjective
value, such as a personal evaluation of productivity, benchmarked satisfaction of either
employees or customers, better students’ or supervisors’ annual evaluations.
For the productivity link to IAQ research project that is reported in this chapter, all
commercial building stock that was not either industrial or residential as defined in Energy
Information Agency (EIA) reports for the USA was included. This includes such buildings as
government and institutional buildings, retail buildings, offices, schools, hospitals and other
non-industrial buildings.
IAQ is only one of the components that affect productivity in commercial buildings and
organisations. Others factors, including management styles, education, training, experience,
salary, business stress, competition and workload, must be accounted for in any productivity
benchmarking study to obtain valid results.
This chapter is a summary of two studies completed for and funded by a national
contractors’ association on the health costs and productivity benefits of improved IAQ. The
original study (Dorgan Associates, 1993) documented the general health costs and productivity
benefits of improved IAQ. The second study (Dorgan et al., 1995) expanded the scope to
include reduction of specific illnesses, which could result in medical cost reductions, by
improving the IAQ. The impact of non-employee productivity benefits was also determined,
based on other prior reports and papers and from non-published work completed by Dorgan
Associates for a number of clients, and by EPRI in some of its energy research projects.
Objectives
The studies were conducted with the following objectives:
• develop a classification system for known and recognised IAQ degradation in commercial
buildings for the United States
• quantify the health cost benefits of good IAQ
• quantify the productivity benefits of good IAQ
• determine the cost to implement known measures and solutions for typical IAQ
degradation.
Assumptions
Due to the relative lack of uniform methods for linking productivity to IAQ and of prior
information on a recognised format for presenting productivity, several assumptions were
Productivity and indoor air quality 109
made and it was decided to report conservative results. The information from the existing
reports could justify productivity benefits 3–6 times those reported in the research and
survey. Likewise, some published reports and papers suggest that the link is small or
random. However, these are minor and some seem to be basically faulted and based on
opinion. Similarly, the reports that conclude benefits of 20 per cent to 40 per cent probably
have misinterpreted the data. Our results are further dependent and based upon the following.
• Building and employee distribution data from the Energy Information Agency (EIA)
are accurate and representative of the whole population of commercial buildings.
• High benefit estimates reported in other studies and papers that did not provide
detailed research procedures were discounted for this study. For this report, a
conservative percentage of these values was used. This was typically a third or sixth of
the implied and reported benefits, based on the research team judgement.
• Only the direct benefits of improving the IAQ were considered. Secondary benefits,
such as fewer inter-office problems due to reduced stress caused by improved IAQ, are
difficult to estimate and were not included.
• Experienced professionals would be involved in determining the proper renovations to
be implemented to improve the IAQ in buildings and that, once installed, the
improvements would be properly maintained to avoid future IAQ problems (includes
training of operation and maintenance personnel). This is clearly a key deterrent to full
implementation of the benefits. However, it does not impact a specific building owner
who has qualified professionals available to implement upgrading of all the existing
building to our ‘ASHRAE 62-1989 level’.
Results
The productivity and health benefits determined by the results in this study affect a large
proportion of those who work, visit, do business or are a customer in the commercial
buildings in the United States. The benefits are monetary (profits or income), and relate to
quality (education and art), health (fewer low-level health issues) and satisfaction (reduced
complaints). These results for direct employee health related productivity benefits are
summarised in Table 9.1. The total productivity benefits for commercial buildings are
summarised in Table 9.2. Both quantifications are based on all buildings meeting ASHRAE
Standards 62-1989 and 55-1992 and related IAQ aspects of these standards that may be
considered recommended, not mandatory. These include humidification, filtration and
maintenance.
The data in Table 9.2 are based on information gathered, but not reported in the original
reports (Dorgan Associates, 1993; Dorgan et al., 1995), in that the client was only interested
Table 9.1 Summary of worker productivity benefits
Inventory
Number of commercial buildings in United States 4,149,000
Total space 58.1 billion ft2 (5.4 million m2)
Number of workers 68.9 million
Productivity and health benefits $54.7 billion/yr

Annual total productivity benefits $8 billion/yr
Annual reduced health cost $62.7 billion/yr
Annual total productivity and health benefits $910/worker/yr
Annual employee-related benefits, total $1.08/ft2 per yr ($11.61/m2 per yr)
Cost to implement
Implement all identified IAQ improvements $87.9 billion
Average cost per area $1.51/ft2 ($16.28/m2)
Average cost per worker $1,276
Initial average economic simple payback 1.4 years
Annual cost to sustain all improvements $4.8 billion/yr
Net 20-year present value of benefits less cost (interest = 3%)

For all improvements $774 billion
Per area for all improvements $13.31/ft2 ($143.33/m2)
Per worker for all improvements $11,227/worker
in employee health-related productivity and health benefits linked to IAQ in commercial

buildings (non-industrial).
Definitions
During the literature review for this research project it became apparent that there
were multiple definitions for almost every key term used in the IAQ field. Therefore,
consistent definitions were developed based on guidance from published information
from ASHRAE and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
Three of the key definitions are for IAQ, sick building syndrome (SBS) and building-
related illness (BRI).
Indoor air quality (IAQ)
ASHRAE (1991) defines indoor air quality as:
attributes of the respirable atmosphere (climate) inside a building including gaseous

composition, humidity, temperature, and contaminants.
Table 9.2 Summary of total productivity benefits
Productivity and health benefits

Annual total productivity benefits $54.7 billion/yr
Annual reduced health costs $8 billion/yr
Annual total productivity and health benefits $62.7 billion/yr
Including annual sales benefits $211.2 billion/yr
Annual employee-related benefits, total $3,065/worker/yr
$3.64/ft2 per yr ($39.11/m2
per yr)
Cost to implement
Implement all identified IAQ improvements $120 billion
Average cost per area $2.07/ft2 ($22.22/m2)
Average cost per worker $1,742
Initial average economic simple payback 0.56 years
Annual cost to sustain all improvements $6.6 billion/yr
Net 20-year present value of benefits less cost (interest = 3%)

For all improvements $2,924 billion
Per square metre for all improvements $50.33/ft2 ($541.48/m2)
Per worker for all improvements $42,438/worker
Air contaminants can be classified (ASHRAE, 1993) as:
particulate or gaseous, organic or inorganic, visible or invisible, toxic or harmless,

submicroscopic, microscopic or macroscopic, stable or unstable.
Sick building syndrome (SBS)
The ASHRAE (1987) Position Paper on indoor air quality defines SBS as follows:
The term ‘sick building’ is used to describe a building in which a significant

number (more than 20 per cent) of building occupants report illness perceived as
being building-related. This phenomenon, also known as ‘sick building syndrome’,
is characterised by a range of symptoms including, but not limited to, eye, nose,
and throat irritation, dryness of mucous membranes and skin, nose bleeds, skin
rash, mental fatigue, headache, cough, hoarseness, wheezing, nausea, and dizziness.
Within a given building, there will usually be some commonality among the
symptoms manifested as well as temporal association between occupancy in the
building and appearance of symptoms. Note: some experts place the percentage
at 10.
Building-related illness (BRI)
BRI is defined as a specific recognisable disease entity that can be clearly related to
chemical, infectious or allergic agents in buildings. The cause of the illness is determined
by clinically lab testing patients and by identifying the source in the building.
Hypersensitivity pneumonitis, humidifier fever, occupational asthma and Legionella
infection are often included as BRI. Indicators of BRI (USEPA, 1991) are that:
• building occupants complain of symptoms such as cough, chest tightness, fever,

chills, sinus congestion, headaches and muscle aches
• the symptoms can be clinically defined and have clearly identifiable causes
• complainants may require prolonged recovery times after leaving the building.
Research methodology
The research methodology used for these studies focused on the compilation of previous
research and reports, both published and unpublished, dealing with the link between
IAQ and productivity. Over 500 reports were reviewed. These include published
reports from the USA and Europe, international proceedings and personal
correspondence. These are listed in the full National Energy Management Institution
(NEMI) Report of 1993 and 1995 (unpublished). From this review, the key reports
were sorted and their data summarised. A description of the specific methodology used
for individual topics is included below. These topics are:
• wellness categories (baseline)

• building and employee inventory
• health and medical effects
• health cost benefits
• productivity benefits, including economics and future preparedness
• recommended improvements
• other benefits.
Wellness categories
Each of the reports reviewed appeared to classify building wellness for commercial
buildings differently. The majority of the reports used two general categories. Typically
these were sick and healthy, but variations such as buildings without known problems
and problem buildings (Woods, 1989) did exist. Other categories of building wellness
(Burge et al., 1987) include:
• buildings with high and low rates of IAQ-related complaints

• SBS buildings as a percentage of the total
• occupant response above and below a given level, including SBS symptoms
• healthy building characteristics, such as humidity, temperature, outside air
• number of SBS-type symptoms reported
• other, or combinations of, methods of reporting the data.
In order to estimate the national implication of unsatisfactory and poor IAQ in terms
of affected employees’ health and productivity, a detailed classification of buildings in
terms of wellness level was necessary. For this report, the various categories found in
the different reports were compared and integrated to obtain consistent and definable
categories. The results from each of the reports were then put into the new categories,
and an average distribution of buildings by wellness category was determined and
assigned. The sub-categories included public and private buildings.
Building and employee (worker) inventory
Building categories based on building use were obtained from the US Energy Information
Administration (1989). The number of buildings, floor space and the number of workers
(employees or occupants) in each building category were obtained from this source.
For a given building type, the number of employees allocated to each wellness category
was based on the valid published reports and wellness categories developed.
Health and medical effects
The primary concern with unsatisfactory and poor IAQ is the degradation of the
employees’ health and related illnesses. Degradation of health not only affects the
personality and happiness of an employee, but also increases medical costs for
employees and employers. A review of research articles from medical, engineering and
legal databases and from unpublished sources was conducted to evaluate the health and
medical effects of unsatisfactory and poor IAQ. Three diseases were reviewed from an
epidemiological viewpoint in the second study (Dorgan et al., 1995):
• hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP)

• occupational asthma (OA)
• sick building syndrome (SBS).
Health cost benefits
From the results of the epidemiological investigations, health cost benefits were
determined for acute respiratory disease (ARD), building-related illnesses (BRI), and
mild IAQ and SBS symptom-related illnesses. The cost data were from several sources,
including:
• Brundage et al. (1988), Dixon (1985) and Woods (1989) for ARD
• researchers’ experience and judgement
• conversations with operation and maintenance people on illness prevalence in
buildings related to poor IAQ
• conversations with medical researchers on clinic visits and hospitalisations related
to poor IAQ.
Productivity
Published and unpublished research projects and reports dealing with productivity in
relation to the IAQ were reviewed. The definition of productivity and the methodology
used in the reports were clearly analysed to ensure that only conservative values of
productivity were used in this study. The results of these previous studies and reports
were combined with the researchers’ experience to determine the percentage
productivity increase for each building wellness category. With the number of workers
in each wellness category, and the annual salary and fringe benefits of the worker
known, the total productivity cost benefits achievable by upgrading a specific wellness
category building to a healthy level was computed.
Recommended improvements
Recommended improvements were developed from the researchers’ experience on

remediation of IAQ problems in commercial buildings. The ultimate goal of implementing
the improvements was that all commercial buildings in the United States would meet
or exceed the relevant ASHRAE Standards (ASHRAE 1989, 1992).
Other benefits
During the course of the study, other non-health/productivity benefits were identified.
These included benefits to individuals, businesses and communities, and avoidance of
litigation. The benefits for individuals, businesses and communities are due to jobs
generated to implement the IAQ improvement projects, and were estimated using
average wage rates and the cost of improvements.
Avoidance of litigation was a major benefit, often overlooked. While there are no
guarantees, case studies were developed showing what happens when the IAQ degrades.
This can be viewed as a risk management economic benefit, in that it is involved on a
percentage of all buildings. It appears to have more benefits than catastrophic losses
related to structure, fire and security. There is another productivity benefit that was
not included in this study. This is the non-productive cost related to IAQ complaints
and problems. There is some information on costs related to fixing a problem or
remediation of a complaint. However, these do not include the cost of time that should
be allocated to the complainant, others in the area, administrators, managers and building
service unit overhead. If we look at a complaint in a hotel room, it usually is ignored on
first reporting, and may consume many hours of hotel staff time and loss of productive
output by the hotel guest, loss of time at the business meeting as they repeat their
complaint, and the time to record and react to solving the IAQ dissatisfaction. This
cost is several times the direct cost to correct the IAQ degradation or marginal
performance. These are benefits that could substantially increase the benefits related
to the link between productivity and IAQ.
Results of research
Using the research methodology described above, results were obtained for:
• building wellness categories

• building inventory
• health and medical effects of poor or degraded IAQ
• health cost benefits
• productivity benefits
• recommended improvements.
Building wellness categories
Five building wellness categories were developed in order to classify fully the existing
commercial building stock in the United States. These are:
• healthy
• generally healthy
• unhealthy, source unknown
• unhealthy, source known
• SBS/BRI.
The rationale for selecting these five categories was based on how other publications
reported information on buildings. Although a number of publications use ‘sick’, ‘problem
building’, ‘satisfactory’ and other terms as well as healthy and unhealthy, it was determined
that the above categories reflected the most positive terminology. They also reflected the
health relationship of productivity to IAQ.
For each category, characteristics were developed in order to define clearly what was
right and what was wrong with a facility, and to make it easier to determine how to improve
IAQ in unhealthy buildings.
Healthys
• Always meets ASHRAE Standards 62-1989 and 55-1992 during occupied periods.
• Eighty per cent or more of the occupants do not express dissatisfaction with the
indoor air quality.
• Building systems are well maintained.
• Building health management exists.
Generally healthy
• Meets ASHRAE Standards 62-1989 and 55-1992 during most occupied periods.
• The factors leading to indoor conditions that do not comply with the ASHRAE
standards for some of the occupied hours are:
– relative humidity falls below recommended minimum 30 per cent in winter
– relative humidity temporarily rises above recommended maximum 60 per cent
during summer days
– outdoor air ventilation rate temporarily drops below recommended minimum
due to occupant density being greater than design value
– lack of maintenance leads to periodic IAQ degradation
– the HVAC system does not operate during low occupancy.
Unhealthy, source unknown
• Would fail to meet ASHRAE Standards 62-1989 and 55-1992 during most occupied
periods, if evaluated.
• More than 20 per cent of the building occupants would consistently express
dissatisfaction with the indoor air quality.
• Less than 20 per cent of the occupants would complain of SBS symptoms.
• Components of HVAC systems and controls that are sources of IAQ problems have
not been identified, by the building management or operating staff.

• SBS symptoms and illnesses shown by occupants would not be related specifically
to the building, if evaluated.
• This category included information from several reports that determined during
investigations or surveys that the building had the above unhealthy characteristics,
but that the building owners or operators did not recognise that a problem existed.
Unhealthy, source known
• Fails to meet ASHRAE Standards 62-1989 and 55-1992 during most occupied periods.
• More than 20 per cent of the building occupants consistently express dissatisfaction
with the indoor air.
• Less than 20 per cent of the occupants show SBS symptoms.
• Subsystems causing poor IAQ have been identified. However, the source of the IAQ
and SBS problems cannot be linked to a specific HVAC component.
• Occasional high levels of IAQ-related complaints or symptoms.
SBS/BRI
• More than 20 per cent of the building occupants complain of SBS symptoms.
• One or more cases of BRI have been documented.
• Occupants report daily symptoms of IAQ-related illness while in the building.
Building and worker inventory
The distribution of specific buildings types by wellness category is given in Table 9.3. The
specific sources for Table 9.3 (Woods, 1989; Woods et al., 1987) include:
• Woods – 50 to 70 per cent of non-industrial buildings in the USA are healthy buildings
(this also includes generally healthy buildings)
• Burge – 9 per cent SBS/BRI buildings
• Putnam – 20 per cent SBS/BRI and unhealthy buildings, source known
• Robertson – 15 to 30 per cent SBS/BRI and unhealthy buildings, source known
• Woods – 20 to 30 per cent SBS/BRI and unhealthy buildings, source known.
Therefore, 60 per cent of all commercial building types were considered to be healthy or
generally healthy, 10 per cent each for SBS/BRI and unhealthy buildings, source known,
and 20 per cent for unhealthy, source unknown buildings. The rationale for distribution of
Table 9.3 Distribution of all and specific building types by wellness categories (%)
Building wellness category National Office buildings Educational Mercantile Lodging Food
building and service (humid service
wellness Government Others climate)*
Healthy 20 10 30 10 30 12 15
Generally healthy 40 20 40 20 35 18 35
Unhealthy, source unknown 20 35 15 35 20 40 30
Unhealthy, source known 10 20 10 20 10 15 12
SBS/BRI 10 15 5 15 5 15 8
Note
*Humidity is an IAQ problem concern in all lodging buildings. Humid climates typically worsen the IAQ problems.
office buildings, education, mercantile and service, lodging and food service was primarily
researchers’ experience and judgement and other reports. This is detailed in the full
report.
The building inventory data for a number of the building categories are given in
Table 9.4. Data for the remaining building sectors are included in the full report.
Health and medical effects of poor IAQ
The results of an epidemiological review of the available research articles on health and
medical effects are summarised below.
• Hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP). Although most studies did not specifically

investigate the effect of IAQ on the outbreaks of respiratory diseases, it was
determined that hypersensitivity pneumonitis in office buildings is usually
associated with the microbial contamination of ventilation air of HVAC systems.
Culprits identified included open coldwater-spray humidification and cooling
systems.
• Occupational asthma (OA). No statistically significant evidence was found to
relate the number of asthma cases to indoor air quality in office building
environments. While a prevalence of asthma was found, apparently related to the
poor indoor air environment in the office building, the sampling size made the
study inconclusive (Hoffman et al., 1993).
• Sick building syndrome (SBS). Based on the research results analysed, it is
certain that SBS is linked to IAQ problems related to HVAC systems. Sufficient
data show a link between SBS symptoms and the indoor air quality in a building.
This conclusion was supported by a statistically significant odds ratio. An odds
ratio is the ratio of the risk of disease in exposed individuals to the risk of the
disease in unexposed individuals.
The odds ratios obtained by Jaakkola and Miettinen (1995) can be used to measure the
strength of association between exposures (mechanical ventilation and natural
ventilation) for SBS symptoms. Their odds ratios ranged from 1.31 to 2.32 for SBS
symptoms. This meant that the individuals exposed to mechanically ventilated system
are 1.31 to 2.32 times more likely to develop SBS symptoms than those exposed to
naturally ventilated systems. All the OR values cited in the Jaakkola and Miettinen
study were statistically significantly larger than 1.0. This is also true of the adjusted
relative risk, 1.51, obtained by Brundage et al. (1988) for acute respiratory diseases
(ARD). The ARD incidence rate obtained by Brundage et al. in mechanically ventilated
army barracks was 0.67 per 100 trainee-weeks, as compared to 0.46 per 100 trainee-
weeks in old barracks with natural ventilation.
Table 9.4 Building inventory data
Building category Total number Total floor Number of workers (thousands)

of buildings space, ft2 (m2),
(thousands) millions* Healthy Generally Unhealthy, Unhealthy, SBS/BRI Total†
healthy source source
unknown known
Food service 241 1,167 291 680 583 233 155 1,942
(108)
Health care 80 2,054 845 1,690 845 423 423 4,226
(191)
Mercantile and 1,278 12,365 3,724 4,345 2,483 1,241 621 12,414
service (1,149)
Office 679 11,802 7,223 10,001 5,278 3,334 1,945 27,718
(1,096)
All other‡ 1,871 30,652 3,679 7,280 5,834 3,034 2,673 22,500
Total used 4,149 58,040 15,762 23,996 15,023 8,265 5,817 68,863
Notes
* US Energy Information Administration, Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey: Commercial Buildings Characteristics 1989, Table 28.
† US Energy Information Administration, Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey: Commercial Buildings Characteristics 1989, Table 19.
‡ This building category includes assembly, education, food sales, public order and safety, skilled nursing, warehouse and other (hangar, crematorium and public restrooms/
showers and telephone exchange).
Odds ratios do not need to be significantly greater or less than 1.0 to show a causal
relationship between the disease of interest and the exposure if a significant general population
is exposed to the disease. Odds ratios derived from epidemiology studies in many areas, such
as formaldehyde, are often low. However, the impact of low odd ratios on the public health
is immense due to the large population that is affected. Therefore, for IAQ where at least 10
per cent of the general population are exposed to SBS symptoms, the impact is sufficiently
significant to warrant action. Some of the best evidence of the impact of IAQ is the comparison
of mechanically ventilated buildings with naturally ventilated buildings. Within these studies,
the best mechanically conditioned buildings performed better than naturally ventilated
buildings. Since humidity is an issue in most US buildings, and new buildings are constructed
energy-efficient, almost all US construction can achieve adequate indoor air quality only
with a mechanical system. A review of existing epidemiological studies indicates a strong
need for adequate mechanical systems in buildings to achieve acceptable IAQ. This is
required to prevent degradation of occupant health and to provide a control environment that
will increase functional productivity.
Health cost benefits
Health cost benefits were determined for ARD, miscellaneous diseases and SBS problems.
The total benefits to health costs due to improving the IAQ were estimated to be $8 billion
per year.
• ARD-related health cost reduction. The ARD cost reduction was calculated using
three separate methods in order to obtain a more accurate estimate. The average medical
cost benefit related to ARD as a result of improving the IAQ in commercial buildings
was estimated to be $1.2 billion per year.
• Other BRI-related cost reduction. The incidence rate for all other miscellaneous
diseases, which include humidifier fever, legionnaires’ disease, occupational asthma,
and lower respiratory diseases from mould and bacteria, will likely be greater than that
for only ARD. However, to maintain a conservative approach, the research team
estimated that the incidence rate was two-thirds of the ARD rate. Therefore, the health
costs attributable to the combination of these other illnesses were estimated to be $800
million per year.
• Mild IAQ-related cost reduction. There are health costs associated with general IAQ
illnesses, including SBS symptoms of rashes, eye irritation, nausea, headaches and
mild coughs. There were no statistically reliable data available on the frequencies of
hospitalisation and clinic visits due to these illnesses. However, based on the review of
buildings over a 20-year period, and on conversations with operation and maintenance
personnel and with medical researchers, the medical costs due to mild IAQ-related
hospitalisation and clinic visits were estimated to be $6.0 billion per year.
Productivity benefits
Research studies document a productivity loss of 2 to 100 per cent in SBS buildings.
The 100 per cent loss resulted from the complete shutdown of a 22-storey office
building in greater Washington, DC while the experts tried to identify the indoor air
pollutants (Hansen, 1991). A majority of the studies indicate an average productivity
loss of 10 per cent due to poor IAQ. Therefore, by improving the IAQ, a conservative
benefit of 6 per cent could readily be achieved. The percentage increase in productivity
for the remaining building wellness categories is as follows:
• unhealthy, problem known – 3.5 per cent

• unhealthy, problem unknown – 3.5 per cent
• generally healthy – 1.5 per cent.
The development of these estimates is provided in the full report.

The annual productivity benefits that can be obtained by upgrading the buildings of
various wellness categories to a healthy level were determined for each building type.
The total annual and per worker productivity benefits related to workers only in
commercial buildings are presented in Table 9.5. This is the information that was used
to develop the summary data in Table 9.1. Additional data were developed for cost and
benefits per unit area, and are reported in Table 9.1. Table 9.2 includes the additional
productivity benefits related to economics of doing business. This includes profits,
increased business, economic benefits to society (such as better education, more use of
museums, faster recovery in hospitals, satisfaction with government). Buildings with
floor space less than 10,000 ft2 were considered small buildings. Buildings with floor
space between 10,000 and 25,000 ft2 were considered medium buildings, and with
floor space greater than 25,000 ft2 large buildings.
Recommended improvements
A description and cost for the recommended improvements is detailed in the following
sections.
Description of recommended improvements
The recommended measures required to improve the HVAC systems of existing buildings
with poor IAQ are listed under two categories:
Table 9.5 Annual productivity benefits
Building type Wellness category Total number of workers Productivity increase per Benefits ($ million)
worker ($)
Small Medium/large Small Medium/large Total
Small Medium/large
Totals 1. Healthy 3,896 12,059 0 0 0 0 0
2. Generally healthy 5,871 18,174 435 435 3,048 9,434 12,482
3. Unhealthy, problem unknown 3,679 11,390 1,016 1,016 4,596 14,228 18,824
4. Unhealthy, problem known 2,036 6,304 1,016 1,016 2,613 8,089 10,702
5. SBS/BRI 1,413 4,374 1,742 1,742 3,117 9,647 12,764
Total 16,895 52,300 4,209 4,209 13,373 41,398 54,772
• meet or exceed the requirements of ASHRAE Standard 62-1989
– change the rate of outdoor air per person to 15 cfm or more

– monitor outdoor air quantity to meet ventilation requirements
– install local exhaust
– increase ventilation effectiveness
– maximise economiser cycle
– relocate air vents
– change the air filtration method
– reduce unwanted infiltration and/or exfiltration
• improve space control to meet the health needs of Standard 62-1989 and meet or
exceed the generally accepted requirements of ASHRAE Standard 55-1992
– improve space temperature control

– improve control or provide positive control of humidity (dehumidification)
– install humidification, self-contained steam humidifiers.
Costs to implement IAQ improvements
The estimated cost of implementing each improvement in a building was estimated as a

fraction of the new construction cost of a mechanical system for the building. The labour and
material costs per building area were obtained. This number was then multiplied by the area
inventory of the building category and the percentage of buildings affected by each
recommended HVAC measure to yield the cost of improvement. Costs were computed for
five climatic zones of the United States. The total costs of improvements for small and
medium/large buildings were estimated to be $7.6 billion and $80.4 billion respectively. The
grand total one-time cost was $87.9 billion.
Maintenance programme
Some of the improvements identified required an increase in the preventative maintenance

programme. This included record-keeping of occupant complaints and training of maintenance
and operation personnel. The cost for this increased maintenance was $4.8 billion per year.
Conclusions and future research requirements
A number of non-industrial buildings in the US stock have degraded indoor air quality. The
percentage of buildings in each of the five levels of IAQ degradation (i.e. wellness categories)
was determined based on previous research findings, researchers’ experience and expert
judgement, conversations with operation and maintenance personnel, and with medical
personnel. A one-time upgrade cost of $87.9 billion, an annual operating cost of $4.8 billion
and a total annual benefit of $62.7 billion resulting in a simple pay-back period of 1.4 years
was estimated as the productivity and health benefits for employees in all commercial (non-
industrial) buildings. This also results in a net 20-year present value of $774 billion ($13.31/
ft2 or $11,227/worker). The productivity benefits related to IAQ are an employee health
issue. The gains are related to a healthier indoor environment and healthier employees.
Therefore, to ensure the future viability of the United States on an international front, the
investment must be made today to reap the benefits. Further, all new and major system
modifications must have IAQ as a priority design intent requirement.
In order to achieve this goal, further research is required, including:
• research studies to investigate fully the causal relationship between the indoor air
quality of commercial buildings and hypersensitive pneumonitis (HP) and occupational
asthma (OA)
• a set of guidelines to perform productivity studies and benchmark existing buildings
properly
• case studies to determine the actual health and productivity benefits that result from
improved indoor air quality due to the implementation of HVAC improvement measures.
Although the evidence is strong for relating health and economic benefits, many require
further scientific data. This issue is following the same historic development as the debate on
health issues and smoking. The evident health and economic benefits are significant and need
to be acted on now.
References
ASHRAE (1989) Standard 62-1989, Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality. Atlanta, GA:
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers.
ASHRAE (1991) ASHRAE Terminology of Heating, Ventilation, Air Conditioning, &
Refrigeration. Atlanta, GA: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning
Engineers.
ASHRAE (1992) Standard 55-1992, Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy.
Atlanta, GA: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers.
ASHRAE (1993) Air contaminants, Handbook of Fundamentals, I-P Edition, 11.8. Atlanta,
GA: American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers.
ASHRAE Environmental Health Committee (1987) Indoor Air Quality Position Paper. Atlanta,
GA: American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers.
Brundage, J.F., R.M. Scott, W.M. Lednar, D.W. Smith and R.N. Miller (1988) Building-associated
risk of febrile acute respiratory diseases in army trainees. J. Am. Med. Assoc., 259(14) Apr,
2108–2112.
Burge, S., A. Hedge, S. Wilson, J.H. Bass and A. Robertson (1987) Sick building syndrome: a study
of 4,373 office workers. Br. Occupational Hygiene Soc., 31(4A), 493–504. See Table 5, p.
502.
Dixon, R.E. (1985) Economic cost of respiratory tract infections in the United States. Am. J.
Med., 78 (suppl. 6B), 45–51.
Dorgan, C.E., C.B. Dorgan and M.S. Kanarek (1995) Productivity Benefits Due to Improved
Indoor Air Quality. Alexandria, VA: National Energy Management Institute.
Dorgan Associates (1993) Productivity and Indoor Environmental Quality Study. Alexandria,
VA: National Energy Management Institute.
Energy Information Administration, US Department of Energy (1991) Commercial Buildings
Characteristics 1989.
Hansen, S.J. (1991) Managing Indoor Air Quality, 5, 37. Lilburn, GA: Fairmont Press.
Hoffman, R.E., R.C. Wood and K. Kreiss (1993) Building-related asthma in Denver office
workers. Am. J. Publ. Health, 83(1), Jan., 89–93.
Jaakkola, J.J.K. and P. Miettinen (1995) Type of ventilation system in office buildings and sick
building syndrome. Am. J. Epidemiol., 141(8), 755–765.
Putnam, V.L., J.E. Woods and T.A. Bosman (1989) Objective measures and perceived responses
of air quality in two hospitals. Proceedings of IAQ ’89: The Human Equation: Health and
Comfort, April 1989, 241–250. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
Conditioning Engineers, Atlanta, GA. See p. 246.
Robertson, A.S., P.S. Burge, A. Hedge, J. Simes, F.S. Gill, M. Finnegan, C.A. Pickering and G.
Dalton (1985) Comparison of health problems related to work and environmental
measurements in two office buildings with different ventilation systems. Br. Med. J., 291,
373–376. See Table 1, p. 374.
Skov, P., O. Valbjorn, B.V. Pedersen and the Danish Indoor Climate Group (1989) Influence of
personal characteristics, job-related factors and psychosocial factors on the sick building
syndrome. Scand. J. Work Environ. Health, 15, 286–295. See Table 2.
US EPA (1991) Indoor Air Quality Facts No.4 (revised), Sick Building Syndrome. Washington,
DC: US Environmental Protection Agency.
Woods, J.E. (1989) Cost avoidance and productivity in owning and operating buildings.
Occupational Medi.: State of the Art Rev., 4(4) Oct.–Dec. 753–770.
Woods, J.E. (1991) An engineering approach to controlling indoor air quality. Environ. Health
Perspect., 95, 15–21.
Woods, J.E., G.M. Drewry and P.R. Morey (1987) Office worker perceptions of indoor air
quality effects on discomfort and performance. Proceedings of Indoor Air ’87: Fourth
International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate 2, Berlin, Aug. 1987, 464–468.
Part 3
The nature of productivity

Chapter 10
Assessment and measurement

of productivity
Derek Clements-Croome and Yamuna Kaluarachchi
Productivity depends on good concentration, technical competence, effective organisation

and management, a responsive environment and a good sense of well-being. The economic
assessment of environment in terms of both health (medical treatment, hospitalisation)
and decreases in productivity (absenteeism) has received very little attention by researchers
as yet. However, this assessment is absolutely necessary in order to assess the effectiveness
of improved design and management protocols (Barbatano, 1994). Until now there have
been no standard procedures to measure productivity, therefore it has been difficult to
persuade clients to accept the concept of a relationship between economic productivity
benefits and indoor environment. The challenge is to investigate productivity and develop
a methodology to assess the link between indoor environment and productivity using
scientific principles and the experiences of occupational psychologists.
The direct beneficiaries of productivity research are clients who commission buildings
and employers who hope to achieve high productivity, as well as construction managers
and contractors who want to achieve a high quality of production; planners; architects,
designers and engineers who are involved in a building project from its genesis; and building
and facilities management consultants who are involved in the day-to-day running and
maintenance of the building and who wish to provide a high level of well-being to its
occupants. Most importantly it will be beneficial to building users who wish to work in,
and enjoy being in, healthy buildings. It is also relevant to academics and researchers in a
variety of fields due to its multidisciplinary nature covering health, well-being and comfort.
Thorndike (1949) described four criteria for performance measures: validity, reliability,
freedom from bias, and practicality. The inclusion of validity and reliability implies that
the standards for performance measures are similar to those of the tests. Bias most frequently
originates from rater bias: in this case, those who use the rating may systematically rate the
performance of particular individuals either higher or lower across a number of dimensions
130 Clements-Croome and Kaluarachchi
than is justifiable from the rated performance. Finally, the concern for practicality as a
measurement criterion is obvious, yet very little attention is given to the discussion of
issues of practicality in the literature. There has been little disagreement abut the four
criteria for performance measurement over the past forty years.
Ilgen and Schneider (1991) classify the methods of performance measurement into three
categories: (i) physiological; (ii) objective; and (iii) subjective. The rationale for using
physiological methods is based on the reasoning that physiological measures of activation
or arousal are associated with increased activity in the nervous system, which is equated
with an increase in the stress on the operator. Common physiological measurements
include: (a) cardiovascular measures (heart rate, blood pressure); (b) respiratory system
(respiration rate, oxygen consumption); (c) nervous system (brain activity, muscle tension,
pupil size); (d) biochemistry (catecholamines). Three fundamental criticisms of
physiological measures of workload have been raised by Meister (1986). First, he questions
the validity of the measures. The evidence supporting a relationship between physiological
and other workload indices is not strong, and the meaning of these relationships when they
do occur is frequently difficult to interpret. Second, the measures themselves are highly
sensitive to contaminating conditions. Third, he argues that the measures are intrusive and/
or impractical. Physiological measures can restrict or interfere with the operator’s task
performance. For example, eye pupil dilation changes with concentration, but measuring it
is intrusive. Also, restrictions imposed by the job (e.g. task demands, safety considerations)
can often limit the number and kind of physiological measures used at one time.
The second of three classes of measures of mental workload has been labelled objective
measures (O’Donnell and Eggemeier, 1986) or task performance. Task performance is
frequently used to infer the amount of workload, both mental and physical. Task measures
are typically divided into primary and secondary task measures. In primary task
performance measurement, the task difficulty for a single task is manipulated and performance
variations are assumed to reflect change in workload. In secondary or comparative task
performance measurement, the person is first presented with a single task and then a
second task is added, or performance is compared across two different tasks and changes
in performance are recorded. Task-based measurement has advantages in that it has high
face validity and is amenable to quantitative and empirical testing. Task measures present
a number of challenges. However, first conclusions based on the task performance allude to
the limited resource model, namely that individuals have a finite pool of resources which
can be devoted to one task or distributed among tasks. If this model does not hold, then the
conclusions from this method are not valid. This procedure has a great deal of utility in the
laboratory where task performance and the introduction of new tasks can be highly controlled
(Meister, 1986). It is often difficult to cross-calibrate (scale) diverse measures across
tasks.
Assessment and measurement of productivity 131
A final set of measures of workload comprises subjective measures (Moray et al.,

1979). Subjective measures of workload are applied to gain access to the subjects’ perceptions
of the level of load they are facing in task performance. Rating scales, questionnaires, and
interviews are used to collect opinions about workload. While these methods may not have
the empirical or quantitative appeal of physiological or objective measures, it is often
argued that subjective measures are most appropriate since individuals are likely to work
in accordance with their feeling regardless of what physiological or behavioural performance
measures suggest (Moray et al., 1979). An assumption of subjective assessment is that
people are aware of, and can introspectively evaluate, changes in their workload, and that
this assumption holds regarding general impressions of the difficulty of ongoing experiences.
When comparing subjective measures with performance measures, high correlations have
been found during early and middle stages of overload (Lysaught et al., 1989). Usually
higher subjective ratings of workload correspond to poorer performance, yet there is
evidence that respondents rate workload more highly in a task that they perform better.
The advantages of subjective measures are that they are easy to implement, non-intrusive,
low-cost, valid, sensitive to workload variations, and they offer a wide range of techniques
(O’Donnell and Eggemeier, 1986).
There is some evidence that air pollution, or the perception that it exists, can create
stress among employees who believe that it poses a threat to their health. The stress may
be particularly intense among people who believe they have no control over the pollution.
It is further argued that psychosocial factors, such as labour–management relations and
satisfaction or dissatisfaction with other factors in the work environment, can have a
profound influence on the level of response of the occupants to their environment.
Productivity measurement may be carried out by using physiological methods, as described
above, and environmental psychological methods.
Early studies have shown that the emotional and behaviour effects due to environment
can be assessed more more easily by questionnaires than by physiological measurements.
Mehrabian and Russell (1974) state that there are three basic emotional responses
(pleasure, arousal, and dominance) which combine and can be used to describe any
emotional state. The effects of the physical environment on emotional and behavioural
responses to work performance can be compared by considering the impacts of environment
on pleasure, arousal and dominance. Environmental psychology has been concerned with
two major topics: the emotional impact of physical stimuli and the effect of physical
stimuli on a variety of behaviours such as work performance or social interaction.
Cooper and Robertson (1990) stated that if you were to look at stress levels in the
organisation, you would find that people reporting a negative attitude to the indoor
environment would also be the people expressing high job dissatisfaction or a low mental
well-being. Our work shows that this can be true, but is not exclusively so. Generally
speaking, occupational stress is regarded as a response to situations and circumstances

that place special demands on an individual with negative results. Cooper and Robertson
(1990) designed an occupational stress indicator to gather information on groups of
individuals. The indicator has six questionnaires concerned with: how one feels about the
job; how one assesses one’s current state of health; the way one behaves generally; how
one interprets events around one; sources of job pressure; and how one copes with general
stress. The sources of stress are multiple, as are the effects. It is not just a function of being
‘under pressure’. The sources may be work-related, but home life can also be implicated.
The effects in terms of health may not just concern how one feels physically, but how one
reacts and behaves in work and at home. The occupational stress indicator (OSI) attempts
to measure: (i) the major sources of occupational pressure; (ii) the major consequences of
occupational stress; and (iii) coping mechanisms and individual difference variables which
may moderate the impact of stress (Cooper, 1988). Questionnaires and semistructured
interviews are used for subjective assessment, and a study of the medical records and the
attendance of the staff members is also made. An environmental aspect has been built into
this indicator covering temperature, ventilation, humidity, indoor air quality, lighting, noise,
crowded work space, and is referred to as EPOSI.
The analytic hierarchy process
In Part 3 of the questionnaire data are collected and then analysed using the analytic
hierarchy process (AHP) originated by Saaty (1972, 1988), as it provides a powerful tool
that can be used to make decisions which involve several variables; it is an effective process
to describe unquantitative systems quantitatively (Fig. 10.1). Schen and Lo (1997) use
AHP to assign weightings for criteria in the prioritisation process of building maintenance.
Here it is used to establish an empirical model under ‘real’ dynamic working conditions for
assessing the impact of indoor environment on health and productivity, by analysing the
priority factors derived using the occupational stress indicator (Cooper and Robertson,
1990).
Figure 10.1 represents a value tree where each of the attributes are compared in terms of
importance using a pair-wise rating process. Ratings are entered on a comparative basis or
derived from questionnaire data analysis. The AHP calculates eigenvectors which assign
weighting factors (Salvendy, 1997).
AHP needs fine judgements using detailed questionnaires aided by semistructured
interviews to derive the levels or layers (or strata) and the elements within them. The
theory of hierarchies is a way of structuring complex multidimensional systems, and analysing
Figure 10.1 The analytic hierarchy process
the interactions of elements in each stratum of the hierarchy in terms of their impact
on elements in the stratum immediately above. A five-stratum hierarchy which assesses
the productivity of occupants in offices and the influence of indoor environment on
productivity is proposed. It is divided into various factors according to their properties
and the main objectives (Li et al., 1996; Li, 1998). The top stratum is a single element
defined as the productivity of occupants in offices. The elements of the strata have
been evaluated using EPOSI. The second and third strata cover human and system
factors (e.g. organisational factors, personal factors, environmental factors); each factor
in the third stratum is evaluated in terms of all the elements in the second stratum. The
fourth and fifth strata deal with health and environmental factors. AHP is an example
of a transdisciplinary model in which coordination is achieved across a level (or
discipline) and between levels (or disciplines).
Subjective measurements and design of

questionnaire
A number of research studies have demonstrated that there is no simple relationship

between single environmental factors and complex human behaviour. The analytic
hierarchy process (AHP) method together with multi-regression and correlation analysis
can be used to establish an empirical model of ‘multi-sensory’ well-being of occupants.
AHP is an effective process to describe unquantitative systems and factors
quantitatively (Saaty, 1972). The system should first be divided into various factors
according to their properties and the main objective. These factors are then classified
in successive hierarchies (levels or layers) through which the analytic hierarchical
model is developed. For example, the importance of the factors in the lowest hierarchy
can be related to the factors in the highest hierarchy on the basis of questionnaire and
semi-structured interview surveys (Yao Runming et al., 1992). On the basis of analysing
factors such as the visual field, hearing, smell, warmth, dust, touch, freshness, and
space, a relationship between ‘multi-sensory’ occupant well-being (indoor environment)
and productivity can be developed.
The subjective assessment used questionnaires answered by occupants across various
work grades and tasks (Cooper, 1988; Raw, 1994). The questionnaire was designed to
elicit:
• background information about the organisation and the workplace

• how frequently the subject suffers from the environment or the job when at work
• the feelings of the subject about their current working situation
• the priority factors influencing health symptoms of occupants in offices
• the priority order among these factors which influence job satisfaction and
productivity of occupants in offices.
The questionnaire contains a common core of questions. Section 1 begins with general
office physical environment and the information regarding the occupant, including
type and status of their workplace, the effect the weather has on their well-
being, health and productivity. Section 2 concentrates on how occupants feel about
their working situations, how much they like the office and how much personal
control they have on a seven-point rating scale. Also of interest are the four self-
report productivity items, consisting of amount of work accomplished, quality of
work, feeling creative, and taking responsibility. Respondents were asked how much
their office environment affected their productivity at work (they may increase or
decrease their productivity because they are affected by current working environment)
on a nine-point scale: decrease by 40 per cent or more, 30 per cent, 20 per cent, or 10
per cent; not at all; increase by 10 per cent, 20 per cent, 30 per cent, or 40 per cent or
more.
Respondents were also asked to rate their level of productivity on a seven-point
rating scale, from extremely dissatisfied to extremely satisfied, and then asked to rate
on a five-point rating scale (no change, increase by 10 per cent, 20 per cent, 30 per
cent, or 40 per cent or more) by what percentage it would increase if the related office
environment problems were resolved.
In section 3, the factors of greatest interest include those concerned with office
environmental conditions which act positively or negatively on the productivity of
the occupants. Also of interest are the responses in terms of physical health conditions
which give rise to sick building syndrome (SBS). The respondents were asked to rate
on a seven-point scale how often they had suffered from SBS conditions in the year
prior to the survey. SBS conditions are prevalent in the work environment, but disappear
when people leave it.
The mental health conditions related to the job were:
• job stress (the stress experienced may cause physical symptoms or emotional
and psychological difficulties)
• job dissatisfaction (dissatisfaction with the job itself, with organisational design
and structure, with achievement value and growth, or with personal relationships)
• an overall dissatisfaction with the indoor environment.
Part 2 of the questionnaire was based on, and developed using, the analytic hierarchy
process which adopts a pair-wise comparison scale in making judgements against
various influencing factors. Five human factors of the individual were selected by
using the occupational stress indicator and after reviewing other related research surveys
and literature, which influence productivity; six system factors (including personal
circumstances) which in turn influence the five human factors were compared with
each other. The various strata shown in Fig. 10.1 can be described as follows:
• human factors of the individual which influence productivity

– well-being (physical and mental health of an individual)
– ability to perform (physical aptitude to carry out an assigned task)
– motivation (mental drive and enthusiasm to carry out a task)
– job satisfaction (the enjoyment attained by carrying out tasks in an
occupation)
– technical competence (the qualifications and the know-how to carry out a
task)
• system factors which influence the human factors of an individual
– indoor environment (the immediate surroundings of one’s internal workspace
(including light, sound, temperature, ventilation, indoor air quality and
pollution))
– occupation (the interest in the job, salary, bonuses, career prospects and job
stress)
– organisation (organisational structure, managerial role and the social
environment)
– personal circumstances (private life, psychological factors, sex, age, health
and behaviour patterns)
– facilities and services (communications, networks, hardware, software and
facilities for occupants provided by organisations)
– outdoor environment (weather conditions and outdoor views).
Environmental factors that influence the indoor environment are: temperature; stale or
stuffy air; draught; dry or humid air; poor indoor air quality; noise; discomfort from
sunlight; insufficient/excessive lighting; crowded workspace.
Health factors influenced by the environmental factors are:
• respiratory problems (dryness, hoarseness, dry/sore throat, changes in voice,

wheezing)
• skin problems (soreness, itching, dry skin, rashes)
• nervous problems (headaches, nausea, drowsiness, tiredness, lethargy, reduced
mental capacity, dizziness, forgetfulness, fatigue)
• nasal-related problems (itchy or teary eyes, runny nose, asthma-like symptoms
among non-asthmatics)
• odour complaints (changes in odour, unpleasant odours or tastes).
Occupant and environmental survey of buildings
This research focuses on the relationship between productivity and the indoor
environment in offices, and takes into account the fact that productivity depends on
other factors by using an ‘occupational stress indicator’ (Cooper, 1988), which has
been developed to include an environmental dimension (Li et al., 1996; Clements-
Croome and Li, 1995). The modified occupational stress indicator (EPOSI) has been
used in the design of the questionnaire to gather information on the occupants in the
surveyed buildings. This method of self-assessment provides valuable information on
individuals, as well as collective responses. In this research a number of environmental
surveys have been carried out to gather data on occupants’ responses on productivity
as well as office physical environmental criteria including air temperature, relative
humidity, air velocity, quantity and quality of light, noise levels, radiation and
electromagnetic fields around workspaces, indoor CO2 concentrations, and thermal
comfort indices.
Pilot studies were carried out at the University of Reading and a local consultancy
office. This survey was limited to six non-air-conditioned buildings using about 170
subjects (Li Baizhan, 1996a). The study used the above methodology to establish:
• how factors such as workplace, environment, management style and job stress
interrelate to affect job satisfaction and productivity in offices
• which are the dominant factors in given situations, by asking subjects to complete
the questionnaires.
The research results showed that there was a strong relationship between job stress, or
job dissatisfaction, and an overall unsatisfactory indoor environment. Based on the
results of the questionnaire survey, an increase of about 10 per cent in office productivity
could result from improving the indoor environment. With the experiences from the
survey, the questionnaire was refined.
Detailed environmental surveys were carried out in the office headquarters of a
building in London in August 1997, and one in Maidenhead in November 1997, in order
to gather data and information on the main factors influencing productivity. About 250
occupants voluntarily participated in the questionnaire survey and provided information
regarding the workplace, the way they feel about their work situations, environmental
criteria, physical and mental health, and factors which they considered influenced their
productivity. The buildings consisted of air-conditioned and non-air-conditioned spaces,
and physical environmental data were measured and monitored for a two-week period.
The survey adopts an approach which gathers data on occupants’ perceived personal
productivity and relates these responses to those responses given regarding their
comfort levels, the degree of control over their working environment and the physical
symptoms in the workplace. The study does not measure the actual productivity but
establishes the key factors affecting productivity. It does measure the relative
productivity between one floor and another, between zones on the same floor and
between individuals.
Case study 1: office building in London
In this office building about 120 occupants participated in the questionnaire survey
during August 1997. The staff mainly belonged to the age group of 20–30 years and
consisted of the ratios of male and female occupants given in Table 10.1.
The type of office space for the majority was open plan. The type of work varied
from floor to floor and belonged to four categories (Table 10.2).
The overall working hours per week were 36–45; about 77 per cent of the group
spent up to 35 hours in front of a visual display unit (VDU). In comparing the
number of working hours reported by individuals, it was seen that the fourth floor
occupants reported a high percentage of people working longer hours. This coincides
with a high percentage of staff spending longer hours in front of visual display units
such as computers or television screens (Table 10.3).
Regarding the weather and their work performance, more than 60 per cent
responded that the weather has an effect on the individual work performance and also
that they work better in the mornings compared to the afternoons. Planting and its use
in the layout of the office interior was insignificant, but some occupants had attempted
to personalise their workspace with a few plants.
Table 10.1 Proportions of male/female occupants, case study 1
Location Male Female

First floor 53.85% 46.15%
Third floor 67.74% 32.26%
Fourth floor 28.57% 71.42%
Table 10.2 Type of work, case study 1
Location Managerial Professional Clerical Other

First floor 7.69% 61.54% 7.69% 23.08%
Third floor 9.35% 61.29% 19.35% —
Fourth floor 14.29% 28.57% 28.57% 28.57%
Table 10.3 Working hours, case study 1
Location Normal working hours (%) Hours spent in front of a VDU (%)
25–35 hours 36–55 hours 25–35 hours 36–55 hours
First floor 30.76 61.53 46.16 30.76

Third floor 32.26 70.96 13.79 24.14
Fourth floor 14.29 85.72 57.14 14.29
In the three floors surveyed, the responses to direct questions regarding dissatisfaction
with ‘the job’ and the ‘indoor environment’ varied widely (Table 10.4).
The results for the first floor contradict those anticipated by Cooper (1990), whereas
those for the third and fourth floors support his contention that people dissatisfied
with their job are likely to be those dissatisfied with their environment. On the third
floor a quarter of the occupants (24.14 per cent) reported that they were dissatisfied
with their job, while the proportion of people who were dissatisfied with their work
environment was about 15 per cent. On the fourth floor half of the occupants stated
that they were dissatisfied with their job and 40 per cent reported a high level of
dissatisfaction with their workplace. On these two floors the dissatisfaction regarding
the job was 10 per cent higher than with the indoor environment.
The first-floor data for dissatisfaction illustrate something quite fundamental from
all these aspects. While the third and fourth floors show that there is a clear relationship
between people feeling dissatisfied about their job and the work environment, the first
floor illustrates that even if people are wholly satisfied regarding their jobs, they can
be quite unhappy with their work environment and this will affect their productivity.
The third and fourth floors are air-conditioned while the first floor is a non-air-
conditioned space which could provide extremely uncomfortably warm conditions on
a hot summer day (when the survey was conducted).
In section 2 of the questionnaire the occupants were given the opportunity to rate
on a seven-point scale their feelings regarding their work situations under four categories:
feelings regarding the job, self-rated level of productivity, the layout of the office, and
the decoration of the office. The responses correlate with the dissatisfaction they
expressed in section 1 of the questionnaire (see Table 10.4) regarding their job and the
indoor environment. In the first instance the question put to the occupants was ‘Is
there any particular day of the week when you feel dissatisfied with your job?’. In the
second instance (see Table 10.5), they were asked to rate their satisfaction or
dissatisfaction according to a seven-point rating scale.
Table 10.4 Dissatisfaction with job and indoor environment,

case study 1
Location % of people dissatisfied with
job indoor environment
First floor 0.00 41.67

Third floor 24.14 14.81
Fourth floor 50.00 40.00
Table 10.5 Satisfaction/dissatisfaction with various factors, case study 1
Location Dissatisfied Not sure Satisfied
Feelings about the job (%)

First floor 0.00 7.69 92.31
Third floor 17.24 17.24 65.52
Fourth floor 16.67 16.67 66.67
Self-rated level of productivity (%)

First floor 0.00 25.00 75.00
Third floor 9.67 9.67 80.65
Fourth floor 0.00 33.33 66.67
Office layout (%)

First floor 7.69 7.69 84.62
Third floor 45.16 6.45 48.39
Fourth floor 66.67 16.67 16.67
Office decor (%)

First floor 38.46 15.38 61.54
Third floor 25.81 25.81 48.39
Fourth floor 50.00 16.67 33.33
The data in Table 10.5 strengthen the responses in Table 10.4. In Table 10.4, the first-
floor respondents report 0 per cent dissatisfaction regarding their jobs and in Table 10.5 they
report the highest percentage of occupants satisfied with their jobs, which reinforces the
consistency of the methodology and its capability for obtaining the same results for
clarification, in a variety of ways, from individual responses.
For the self-rated level of productivity the fourth floor reports the lowest percentage
of satisfied occupants (66 per cent) which could be related to the higher number of working
hours, and the dissatisfaction about the job and the workplace environment. It was also
observed that this floor had a majority of female occupants (71 per cent) involved in
clerical (28 per cent) and other types of work (28 per cent), compared with the high
percentage of professionals on the other two floors (61 per cent). This suggests that
occupants with lower status jobs are more likely to feel a higher level of dissatisfaction.
The third-floor occupants report the highest self-rated level of productivity in accordance
with low satisfaction scores for the job and the environment.
Regarding the layout of the office, the occupants on the third and fourth floors reported
a high level of dissatisfaction but the first-floor occupants reported a high level of satisfaction
with the indoor environment. The third floor consisted of the largest open plan office
which was shared by about 55 occupants. The dissatisfaction they showed could have
been due to the crowding and the size of the individual spaces, which were smaller than for
the other floors. For example, the fourth-floor open plan office was smaller and more
private than the third floor.
Concerning the decoration of the office in terms of colour, texture and fittings, the
majority of users from the third and first floors stated that they were satisfied, but the
responses for the fourth floor illustrated that half of the occupants were dissatisfied.
These responses echo some of the research findings described in Section 1.1 of the Ellis
study (1994).
The fourth-floor respondents consistently express dissatisfaction regarding various
aspects of their jobs as well as the office environment; in the section below it is seen that
these respondents also show more physical and mental health symptoms.
The responses from all three floors are important, as they illustrate that at a strategic
level:
• work and indoor environment are related

• the methodology provides consistent results to the same questions presented in a
variety of brainstorming methods for clarification
• the methodology is sensitive enough to detect various differences in individual
responses
• productivity depends on a broad range of issues.
The influence of indoor environment on well-being and

productivity
Scientific studies indicate that productivity can increase by as much as 15 per cent when
workers are satisfied with their environment. In addition, current case studies show that
high financial returns can be realised from increased productivity within an organisation
(Lomonaco and Miller, 1997). There are lots of tell-tale signs when productivity is suffering:
absenteeism, sickness leave, people coming late and leaving early, extended tea and lunch
breaks, increased risk of accidents, increased complaints, excessive socialisation, slow
work output and increase in mistakes.
Factors such as poor lighting, both natural and artificial; poorly maintained or designed
air-conditioning; and poor spatial layouts are all likely to affect performance at work. In a
survey of 480 UK office occupiers, Ellis (1994) found that 96 per cent were convinced that
the design of a building affects productivity. When asked an open-ended question to
categorise the aspects of design that they felt would contribute, to this 43 per cent used
words such as attractive, good visual stimulus, colours and windows; 41 per cent
mentioned good morale, ‘feel-good’ factor and contented happy staff; 19 per cent said
more comfortable, relaxing, restful conditions to work in; 16 per cent said increases
in motivation and productivity; 15 per cent said improved communications; 3 per cent
or less said reduced stress. The highest percentage (43 per cent) is regarding the layout
and decoration of the office space which demonstrates the importance of this criterion and
strengthens the findings presented in Table 10.5. Here the highest percentage of occupant
dissatisfaction is regarding the layout and decoration of the office.
The results of the analysis for this survey show that productivity is affected by
environmental conditions. Even though there were mixed responses to direct questions
regarding whether the indoor environment affects physical and mental health, the responses
for well-being and productivity show that the majority consider the office physical
environment as a major aspect which affects these factors (Figs 10.2 and 10.3).
On the first floor, a high percentage of people responded that the office physical
environment affected their physical and mental health, well-being and productivity, and
this floor contained the highest percentage dissatisfied with their indoor environment. The
responses for the fourth floor vary and even though there was a high degree of job
dissatisfaction, 50 per cent of people thought that indoor environment affects health,
wellbeing and productivity.
Figure 10.2 Does the physical office environment affect well-being?

Figure 10.3 Does the physical office environment affect productivity?
For direct questions concerning the degree of influence the office environment has on the
quantity and quality of work and on being creative and taking responsibility, the
responses ranged from it has a little to a large effect on these factors. More than 33 per cent
of the occupants from the first and fourth floors reported that the office environment has a
large effect on being creative and the quantity of work that they can carry out; more than 50
per cent from the fourth floor felt the same regarding the quality of the work.
The amount of increase in productivity by improved environmental conditions was felt
by about one-third of the occupants on the third and first floors to be as much as 30 per cent;
a third of the occupants on the fourth floor felt that a 50 per cent increase in productivity
was possible (Table 10.6).
It should be noted that the fourth-floor occupants reported a low level of productivity
compared to the other floors and higher degree of dissatisfaction with their conditions. The
data are interrelated and illustrate the basic relationship of productivity, satisfaction with job
and workplace.
Personal control and its influence on productivity
A healthy building must satisfy individual user needs. As there are innumerable reasons for
different users having different requirements at different times, this implies that the user
must have a degree of control over what the building provides for them. The ratings from
respondents regarding their typical office working conditions (comfort, temperature,
ventilation, air quality, humidity, and satisfaction) show that there are diverse responses to
the same environmental conditions. These differences between individuals can be physiological
and/or psychological due to age, sex, clothing, activity, fatigue, thermal history, current state
of health, allergy or hypersensitivity (Wyon, 1992).
Table 10.6 Self-projected possible improvements in productivity through improved

conditions, case study 1
Location 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
First floor 16.67 0.00 8.33 33.33 8.33 16.67 8.33 8.33
Third floor 6.9 24.14 31.03 24.14 0.00 6.90 3.45 3.45
Fourth floor 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 0.00 33.33 0.00 0.00
The analysis indicated that, as found in other research, improving personal control over
temperature, ventilation and lighting improves self-rated productivity. Perception of having
personal control of one’s own environment in the workplace leads to improved comfort
judgements as well as psychological benefits and territorial needs. Psychological benefits
could result in increased job satisfaction, increased satisfaction regarding the workplace and
increased motivation, which in turn can result in an optimum level of productivity.
The survey results indicated that there was very little personal control in adjusting the
temperature, ventilation and lighting levels around each individual working space. This is one
of the main reasons why people were dissatisfied with their workplace, because personal
control gives one the ability and the flexibility to change the environmental conditions as
required. Figures 10.4 and 10.5 illustrate that the majority of the occupants felt there was
little personal control at their workplaces.
Thermal conditions, air flow, lighting and background noise masking for privacy are all
needs which are significantly different and vary over the course of a day. For example, older
employees typically need more light (Lighting Research Institute, 1989), and female workers
are known to prefer higher temperatures (Weiner, 1994). From personal comments provided
by the respondents, a repeated complaint was that the temperature, ventilation
Figure 10.4 Personal control over temperature

Figure 10.5 Personal control over lighting
and lighting provided in the workplace were the same throughout the day. This
condition gets worse in the winter, as the conditions provided for the morning are
uncomfortable in the afternoon. If flexible personal control methods can be provided, the
occupants can adjust their environmental conditions to suit individual comfort levels and
needs throughout the occupancy period.
Comfort and health in the workplace
Unless a person feels a positive sense of well-being they will not perform as effectively,
and an optimum level of productivity will not be achieved. To enjoy a good sense of well-
being a person should enjoy their workplace. The physical environment has a marked
influence on the occupants’ mood and comfort level. Temperature and humidity, ventilation,
light, noise and crowding are the most important factors in determining a good working
environment. While the occupants were responding to the questionnaire, a number of
environmental criteria were monitored. These include temperature and humidity levels, air
speed, light and sound levels, indoor CO2 concentrations, radiation and electromagnetic
levels.
In section 3 of the questionnaire, a list of adverse environmental conditions were
presented to the participants and they were asked to rate their responses on a seven-point
rating scale ranging from ‘never’ to ‘always’. The percentage of occupants who ‘frequently/
very frequently’ or ‘always’ endured these conditions are given in Table 10.7.
The first floor reported the highest number of adverse environmental conditions endured
by occupants; the fourth floor reported the second highest percentages (Table 10.7).
According to the analysis, from the percentage of occupants that frequently endured
adverse environmental conditions, the most common conditions suffered were:
Table 10.7 Cited presence of adverse environmental conditions, case study 1
Negative environmental condition % of occupants
First floor Third floor Fourth floor
Draught 0.00 6.45 0.00

Stale/stuffy air 69.23 35.48 57.14
Dry/humid air 69.23 25.81 42.86
Dusty air 15.38 6.45 28.57
High or low temperature;
temperature changes 76.92 38.71 71.43
Little or too much daylight 15.38 19.35 28.57
Little or too much light 30.77 16.13 0.00
Flickering light 0.00 6.45 0.00
Annoying reflections 0.00 12.90 0.00
Vibrations, sounds or noise 46.15 22.58 14.29
Static electricity 0.00 3.23 0.00
Crowded workspace 7.69 38.71 85.71
1. high/low temperature or temperature changes

2. stale/stuffy air and dry or humid air
3. insufficient daylight and low-quality general lighting
4. crowded workspaces.
These findings are related to the health symptoms suffered by the occupants. Those
who experience symptoms of ill-health are the least satisfied with the environmental
conditions at their place of work. It is evident that the occupants believed that health
symptoms can affect their productivity because it can result in absenteeism, leaving
work early, feeling lethargic, depression or headaches.
The majority of participants that suffered health symptoms belonged to the fourth
floor. This could be related to the high rate of dissatisfaction with the indoor environment
and their jobs which the occupants reported, and also the low level of self-rated
productivity. The first floor reported the second highest number of people suffering
from health symptoms. The most common physical symptom felt by the majority
was ‘do not want to get up in the morning’ or ‘feeling lethargic’ at workplace.
Inability to sleep and nasal-related problems were the second most common
conditions felt by the occupants.
Table 10.8 illustrates clearly the facts which have been discussed throughout the
analysis. The highest dissatisfaction regarding office environment is expressed by
people on the first floor and is reinforced by the occupants’ attitude to the office
environment and its effect on physical and mental health, well-being and productivity.
It was also observed that it was not the layout or the decoration that they were dissatisfied
Table 10.8 Levels of stress and dissatisfaction, case study 1
Location The percentage of people who frequently suffered
job stress job dissatisfaction overall unsatisfactory

indoor environment
Third floor 6.67 23.33 15.38

First floor 7.69 7.69 30.77
Fourth floor 14.29 14.29 28.57
about, but the overall design and the performance of the office space.
The highest level of job stress and a high level of job dissatisfaction were evident on the
fourth floor, which was reflected in the low level of self-rated productivity. The majority of
occupants who suffered health symptoms were from this floor, which again correlates to the
high level of job stress illustrated.
The third floor reports a low level of job stress and dissatisfaction with the indoor
environment, but a high level of job dissatisfaction.
In summarising all these factors it was clearly seen that the responses for the first floor
were consistent in their dissatisfaction towards the indoor environment while maintaining a
quite high level of satisfaction regarding the job and related stress and health symptoms. The
fourth floor reported a high level of dissatisfaction regarding the job and the indoor
environment, but the compiled information shows that the dissatisfaction is quite high in
factors related to the work organisation rather than the indoor environment.
Priority factor analysis according to the analytic hierarchy

process model
Using the responses from the questionnaires, pair-wise comparison of judgements was
compiled. Each wing on each floor surveyed was looked at independently and then averaged
to arrive at results which concern all floors. From the results it was clear that well-being is
the main human factor which influences productivity of occupants in offices. The other two
human factors which had a very significant influence on productivity were ability to perform
and motivation. These are well illustrated in the responses for several wings and most
floors. Technical competence appears to play a less important role in influencing
productivity (Figs 10.6 and 10.7).
Figures 10.8 and 10.9 show that the system factors that influence the human factors of
the individual are interrelated; the responses show that the indoor environment is given
varying degrees of importance. Personal, occupational and organisational factors have a
considerable influence but it was clearly observed that in many office wings surveyed,
Figure 10.6 Main human factors influencing productivity: all floors
Figure 10.7 Main human factors influencing productivity: fourth floor
factors which relate directly to a person’s physical and mental health and feelings about an
individual’s work situation, such as well-being, ability to perform and motivation, are
significantly influenced by the indoor environment.
The research findings are summarised as follows.
• The responses for the third and fourth floors support Cooper and Robertson’s (1990)
views that people dissatisfied with their jobs are likely to be dissatisfied with the
indoor environment (Tables 10.4 and 10.5).
• The responses for the first floor contradict Cooper and Robertson’s (1990) views and
show that even if people are wholly satisfied with their jobs, they can be quite
unhappy about the work environment (Table 10.3).
Figure 10.8 Relative importance of system factors with respect to ability to perform:
fourth floor
Figure 10.9 Relative importance of system factors with respect to motivation: third floor
• The first-floor occupants expressed satisfaction with the layout and the
decoration, but dissatisfaction about the overall design and the performance
of the workspaces. The third floor behaved contrarily and expressed
satisfaction regarding the overall office but dissatisfaction regarding the
layout, which could relate to crowding and small individual spaces (Table
10.5).
• When dissatisfaction regarding the job and the indoor environment is high, a
low level of self-rated productivity is evident. The lowest percentage of
satisfied occupants belonged to the fourth floor (Table 10.5).
• The fourth floor consisted of a majority of female occupants involved in

clerical and other types of work compared to the high percentage of male
professionals on the other two floors. This indicates that the occupants with
lower status jobs tend to feel a higher dissatisfaction (Table 10.5).
• A high percentage of people from the first floor responded that the office
physical environment affected their physical and mental health, and this
floor contained the highest percentage dissatisfied with their indoor
environment).
• A very high percentage of occupants from all floors considered the office
physical environment as a major factor in enhancing well-being and
productivity (Figs 10.2 and 10.3).
• Occupants from the first and fourth floors reported that the office
environment has a large effect on being creative and the quantity of work
they carry out; occupants from the fourth floor felt the same regarding the
quality of work.
• The amount of increase in productivity by improved environmental conditions
was perceived to be as much as 30–50 per cent (Table 10.6).
• A repeated complaint was that the temperature, ventilation and lighting
provided in the workplace were the same throughout the day.
• There was very little personal control in adjusting the temperature, ventilation
and lighting levels around each individual working space (Figs 10.4 and 10.5).
• Flexible personal control methods were desired by the occupants to adjust
their environmental conditions to suit individual comfort levels and needs.
• The adverse environmental conditions suffered by the majority were:

2. stale/stuffy air and dry or humid air
4. crowded workspaces (Table 10.7).
• The fourth floor reported the highest number of occupants suffering from
health symptoms; the first floor reported the second highest.
• The most common physical symptom felt by the majority was ‘do not want
to get up in the morning’ or ‘feeling lethargic’ in the workplace. Inability to
sleep and nasal-related problems were the second most common conditions.
• The highest level of job stress and a high level of job dissatisfaction were on
the fourth floor, which was reflected in the low level of self-rated productivity
(Tables 10.5 and 10.8).
• The third floor reported a low level of job stress and dissatisfaction with
indoor environment, but showed a high level of job dissatisfaction (Table

10.8).
• Well-being is the main factor which influences productivity of occupants in
offices. The other two factors which had a very significant influence on
productivity were ability to perform and motivation. Technical importance
appears to play a less important role in influencing productivity (Figs 10.6
and 10.7).
Factors which relate directly to a person’s physical and mental health and feelings
about an individual’s work situation, such as well-being, ability to perform and
motivation, are greatly influenced by the indoor environment (Figs 10.8 and
10.9).
Case study 2: office building in Maidenhead
In this office about 100 occupants participated in the questionnaire survey during
November/December 1997. It was conducted in a two-week period and
environmental data were recorded and monitored for this time period. Three zones,
including the right and left wings of the first floor and the left wing of the ground
floor, were taken into consideration. Planting in the layout of the office interior
was minimal except for the occasional potted plant. Similarly to case study 1, the
staff mainly belonged to the age group of 20–30 years but included a spread in age
groups. The first floor, had a majority of female occupants while the ground floor
had a majority of male occupants (Table 10.9).
Again, the main type of office space was ‘open plan’; the type of work is
categorised in Table 10.10.
Table 10.9 Proportions of male/female occupants,

case study 2
Location Male Female

First floor, left wing 38.46% 61.52%
First floor, right wing 44.44% 55.56%
Ground floor 56.00% 44.00%
Table 10.10 Type of work, case study 2
Location Managerial Professional Clerical Other
First floor, left wing 21.62% 37.84% 29.73% 10.81%

First floor, right wing 33.33% 16.67% 44.44% 5.56%
Ground floor 20.83% 54.17% 20.83% 4.17%
The ground floor housed a large number of professionals and managers, while
the first floor had a good distribution of all types of work groups.
As for case study 1, the occupants had overall working hours per week in
the range 36–45 and 77 per cent of the group spend up to 35 hours in front of a
visual display unit (VDU). A higher proportion of the occupants in this office
reported longer working hours than the occupants in the London office. Of the
three zones, the ground floor reports the highest number of working hours (Table
10.11), and the type of work illustrates that this is mainly occupied by
professionals and managers.
Regarding the weather and its effect on work performance, contrary to the
results obtained by the London study, more than 66 per cent responded that the
weather has no effect on the individual work performance. The results for the
first floor illustrate that the occupants work better in the mornings than in the
afternoons, while the results for the ground floor indicate that the occupants
perform similarly whether it is morning or afternoon.
Results regarding dissatisfaction with ‘the job’ and the ‘indoor environment’
varied considerably from those obtained in the London office (Table 10.12).
The results in all three cases support the contention of Cooper and Robertson
(1990) that people dissatisfied with their job are likely to be dissatisfied with
their indoor environment. On the first floor, left wing, more than 25 per cent state
that they are dissatisfied with their job and a similar percentage express
dissatisfaction with the indoor environment. The other two zones illustrate low
Table 10.11 Working hours, case study 2
Location Normal working hours (%) Hours spent in front of a VDU (%)
25–35 hours 36–55 hours 25–35 hours 36–55 hours
First floor, left wing 28.21 71.80 71.80 28.2

First floor, right wing 22.23 77.78 77.78 22.20
Ground floor 19.23 80.77 76.92 23.08
Table 10.12 Dissatisfaction with job and indoor environment,

case study 2
Location % of people dissatisfied with
the job the indoor environment
First floor, left wing 28.21 25.64

First floor, right wing 16.67 22.22
Ground floor 13.04 17.39
percentages of dissatisfaction for the job and indoor environment; the ground
floor reports lowest dissatisfaction. The ground floor consisted of a majority of
male professionals compared to the majority of female occupants involved with
clerical and other types of work on the first floor (similar to the London study),
indicating that people with low status jobs tend to feel a higher level of
dissatisfaction regarding their job and indoor environment. In these two cases
(first floor, right wing and ground floor) the dissatisfaction regarding the indoor
environment is much higher than with the job; this is prominently illustrated in
the first floor, right wing data.
The responses for section 2 of the questionnaire correlate with the
dissatisfaction expressed regarding the job and the indoor environment (Table
10.13).
In accordance with the data illustrated previously (Table 10.12), the first floor,
left wing respondents report the lowest level of satisfaction for all criteria while
the ground floor respondents report the highest. For the self-rated level of
productivity all three zones report a high percentage of more than 82 per cent of
satisfied occupants, which again relates to the high percentage of occupants being
Table 10.13 Satisfaction/dissatisfaction with various factors, case study 2
Location Dissatisfied Not sure Satisfied
Feelings about the job (%)
First floor, left wing 7.69 17.95 74.36

First floor, right wing 11.11 11.11 77.78
Ground floor 7.4 7.4 83.4
Self-rated level of productivity (%)

Ground floor 8.00 4.00 88.00
Office layout (%)

Ground floor 33.33 12.50 62.49
Office decor (%)

Ground floor 32.00 12.00 56.00
satisfied about the job and the workplace. The ground floor occupants report the
highest level of self-rated productivity (88 per cent), which strengthens the previous
findings.
The level of satisfaction with the layout and the decoration of the office is lower. The
first floor, left wing again reports the lowest level of satisfaction, while the ground floor
reports the highest. The first floor, right wing seems to be the happiest regarding the
physical environment. The first floor is mainly open plan office, compared to the more
cellular offices on the ground floor. The low level of satisfaction on the first floor could be
due to the crowding, the size of the individual spaces, giving lack of privacy. Even though
the ground floor shows a high level of satisfaction regarding the job and productivity, it
shows a lower satisfaction rate regarding the indoor environment.
Individual comments provided on the questionnaire indicate that the occupants were
generally unhappy about the lighting system and considered it to be of poor quality. This
was reflected in all three zones; the company was in the process of replacing the entire
lighting system due to increasing complaints about its quality and about headaches believed
to be due to the lighting system.
The influence of indoor environment on well-being and

productivity
To questions regarding whether the office physical environment has an effect on physical
and mental health, well-being and productivity, the responses varied widely from those
found by Ellis (1994). On the first floor the majority considered that the office physical
environment has an effect on the physical and mental health of the individuals, while the
majority of occupants on the ground floor considered that this was not so. Even though
these responses varied from the previous study, the responses regarding whether the
indoor environment affects well-being and productivity were similar and showed that the
majority considered that the office physical environment has an effect (Figs 10.10 and
10.11). This fact is not as significant as in the London study. This methodology enables
priority factors to be established and detects strong and weak aspects which contribute to
the productivity.
A high percentage of people on the first floor considered that the office physical
environment affected their physical and mental health, well-being and productivity, and
this floor contained the highest percentage dissatisfied with their indoor environment. The
responses for the ground floor varied, and the percentage of people who thought that the
indoor environment affected health, well-being and productivity was lower at about 50 per
cent.
Responding to direct questions concerning the degree of influence the office environment
has on the quantity and quality of work and on being creative and taking responsibility,
the answers ranged from its having a little to a large effect on these factors
Figure 10.10 Does the physical office environment affect well-being?
Figure 10.11 Does the physical office environment affect productivity?
(similarly to the London office). More than 20 per cent of the occupants from the first floor
reported that the office environment has a large effect on the quantity and quality of work
that they can carry out; more than 20 per cent from the first floor, right wing reported that
the office environment has a very large effect on being creative.
The amount of possible increase in productivity by improved environmental conditions
was felt by the occupants to be 20–30 per cent; the highest number of occupants who felt
this was on the ground floor, where job satisfaction was high and the satisfaction related to
the indoor environment was lower (Table 10.14).
Personal control and its influence on productivity
The survey results indicated that there was very little personal control in adjusting the
temperature, ventilation and lighting levels around each individual working space.
Figures 10.12 and 10.13 illustrate that the majority of the occupants felt there is little
Table 10.14 Self-projected possible improvements in productivity through improved

conditions, case study 2
Location 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
First floor,left wing 14.29 48.57 20.00 5.71 0.00 5.71 0.00 5.71
First floor,right wing 17.65 35.29 23.53 5.88 5.88 5.88 0.00 5.88
Ground floor 21.74 9.45 26.07 8.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Figure 10.12 Personal control over temperature
Figure 10.13 Personal control over lighting
personal control at their workplaces (the same conclusion as in the London office survey).
A complaint voiced by most occupants was that they have no access to a window and
that they are deprived of a view to the outside which resulted in depressing conditions.
Even though the windows provide light and ventilation it seems that there is more of a
psychological need to have access to a window and consciously know what is happening
outside. The majority of occupants stated that it would be ideal if they could have views to
a green area, but they would settle just to have an outside view.
Comfort and health in the workplace
Table 10.15 shows that first floor, left wing reported the highest number of adverse
environmental conditions endured by occupants, and the ground floor reported the lowest
percentages for many but not all aspects. From the percentages of occupants that frequently
endured adverse environmental conditions, the most common conditions suffered by a
majority were:

3. stale/stuffy air and dry/humid air
4. noise problems.
These findings are similar to the adverse conditions reported by occupants in the London
office survey.
The findings in the environmental survey correlate with the health symptoms suffered by
the occupants; it is clearly seen from the data for the first floor, left wing that the highest
number of health symptoms occur there (Table 10.16). A common and repeated complaint
was that illnesses caught by an individual noticeably circulate fast and spread to almost
Table 10.15 Cited presence of adverse environmental conditions, case study 2
Negative environmental condition % of occupants
First floor, First floor, Ground floor

left wing right wing
Draught 14.29 16.67 0.00

Stale/stuffy air 42.86 27.78 37.50
Dry/humid air 50.00 22.22 37.50
Dusty air 9.76 11.11 12.00
High or low temperature;
temperature changes 58.14 50.00 39.13
Little or too much daylight 45.24 38.89 30.43
Little or too much light 28.57 33.33 13.04
Flickering light 4.88 0.00 0.00
Annoying reflections 17.07 11.11 12.50
Vibrations, sounds or noise 26.83 22.22 20.83
Static electricity 9.76 11.11 4.17
Crowded workspace 7.32 15.79 8.33
Table 10.16 Occurrence of symptoms, case study 2
Symptom % of occupants
First floor, First floor, Ground floor

left wing right wing
Inability to sleep 19.05 18.75 12.00

Indigestion or sickness 7.50 0.00 8.33
Shortness of breath/dizziness 2.50 18.75 0.00
Changes in appetite 10.26 25.00 0.00
Do not want to get up in the
morning or lethargy 40.00 31.25 24.00
Sweating/heart pounding 10.00 31.25 8.33
Shivering/muscle, joint pain 7.32 22.22 4.17
Nervous problems 30.00 11.76 16.67
Nasal-related problems 25.00 0.00 16.67
Sensory irritations in mouth 19.51 17.65 8.00
Skin problems 23.68 5.88 12.50
Odour or taste problems 2.63 17.65 0.00
everybody surrounding that particular area within days or weeks. This mainly referred
to colds and viral flus; there have been instances where a number of people have been
off sick with the same symptoms.
The occupants on the first floor, left wing complained about the highest number of
health symptoms. This is related to the low level of self-rated productivity and the
dissatisfaction regarding the job and the indoor environment. The first floor, right wing
reported the second highest number of people suffering from health symptoms; this is
in accordance with the other high levels of satisfaction shown for the ground floor,
where the lowest number of health symptoms were reported. The most common
physical symptom felt by the majority was ‘do not want to get up in the morning’
or ‘feeling lethargic’ in the workplace (similarly to the London office). Nervous
problems were the second most common conditions felt, followed by nasal-related
problems and sweating/heart pounding.
Even though the occupants report a high level of productivity and a low overall
dissatisfaction with a variety of factors (Table 10.17), the levels of job stress and job
dissatisfaction are much higher than in the London office building. Contrarily, the
percentage that felt they had an overall unsatisfactory indoor environment was much
lower than in the London study. On the first floor, left wing 25 per cent reported
dissatisfaction with their indoor environment and the job. The ground floor report the
lowest dissatisfaction with the indoor environment, and experienced the lowest level
of job stress.
In summary, the ground floor clearly housed a group of professionals who were
fairly satisfied with their job and less satisfied with their indoor environment, but did
Table 10.17 Levels of stress and dissatisfaction, case study 2
Location Percentage of people who frequently suffered
job stress job dissatisfaction overall unsatisfactory

indoor environment

Ground floor 12.50 25.00 12.50
not depend on any external factors to provide the motivation and inspiration they
needed. They enjoyed a good sense of well-being and this was reflected in all
aspects of the responses and the environmental and health conditions that they
experienced. Contrarily, on the first floor, left wing occupants reported the highest
level of dissatisfaction regarding their jobs and workplaces. This work group
consisted of a majority of female workers involved in a variety of job types and
showed the maximum number of environmental and health symptoms. The first
floor, right wing produced data which lay between these two areas.
Priority factor analysis according to the analytic hierarchy

process model
Results from the AHP analysis illustrate similar trends as for the London office.
Well-being and other factors relating to mental and physical health play an important
role in influencing productivity of occupants in offices. The results for the three
zones varied considerably and do not conform to such a consistent pattern as
they did in the London study. The other factors that had a very significant influence
on productivity, in order of importance, were ability to perform, motivation
and job satisfaction. Similarly to the previous study, technical competence
appears to play a less important role in influencing productivity (Figs 10.14 and
10.15).
The system factors that influence the ‘human factors of the individual’ are
interrelated and the responses show a varying level of importance. It should be
noted that in the London office, the indoor environment was given considerable
importance as a system factor which influences productivity, compared to the
results achieved in this office. Personal, occupational, organisational factors
seemed to have a much higher importance in influencing productivity. Results for
the first floor, left wing show that with respect to well-being, indoor environment
is given quite a high priority (Figs 10.16 and 10.17).
Figure 10.14 Main human factors influencing productivity: all floors
Figure 10.15 Main human factors influencing productivity: ground floor, left wing
Figure 10.16 Relative importance of system factors with respect to well-being: all floors
Figure 10.17 Relative importance of system factors with respect to well-being: first floor,
left wing
Summary of the research findings
• A higher proportion of the occupants in this building reported longer working hours
than in the London building, and the dissatisfaction regarding the indoor environment
was much less than in the London office (Tables 10.11 and 10.12).
• It was noted that occupants with higher job status expressed a lesser degree of
dissatisfaction regarding the job and the indoor environment. This was evident in
both buildings (introductory information and Table 10.12).
• The dissatisfaction levels expressed were higher for indoor environment than for the
jobs (Table 10.12).
• The self-rated productivity levels were much higher than in the London building
(Table 10.13).
• The amount of increase in productivity by improved conditions as expressed by
occupants was much less than in the London study. This could again relate to the high
levels of self-rated productivity (Tables 10.13 and 10.14).
• There was very little personal control in adjusting temperature, lighting and ventilation
according to individual needs. Frequent complaints were attributed to the poor-
quality lighting system and the resulting headaches and other health symptoms.
Inaccessibility of windows and outside views was disliked.
• The adverse environmental conditions suffered were similar to those in the London
building, and could be summarised as follows (Table 10.15):


3. stale/stuffy air and dry/humid air
4. noise problems.
• The occupants on the first floor reported the highest number of health symptoms.
They also felt a low level of self-rated productivity and a higher degree of dissatisfaction
regarding the job and the indoor environment (Table 10.16).
• The most common physical symptom felt by the majority was ‘do not want to get up
in the morning’ or ‘feeling lethargic’ at the workplace. Nervous problems were
the second most common condition felt, followed by nasal-related problems and
sweating/heart pounding. A common complaint was that illnesses spread rapidly
among staff (similar to the London building).
• Even though the staff reported a high level of productivity and a low level of
dissatisfaction regarding the indoor environment, they expressed a high level of job
stress and job dissatisfaction.
• Well-being seems to be a major factor in enhancing productivity. The other factors
which had a very significant influence on productivity, in order of importance, were
ability to perform, motivation and job satisfaction. As in the London study, technical
importance appears to play a less important role in influencing productivity.
• The indoor environment as a system factor which influences productivity, was given
considerable importance in the London office compared to the results achieved in this
study, where personal, occupational, organisational factors seemed to have much
higher importance in influencing productivity. However, results for the first floor, left
wing show that with respect to well-being, indoor environment is given quite a high
priority.
Conclusions
A good working environment will help to provide the user with a good sense of well-being,
inspiration and comfort. The main advantage of good environments is in terms of reduced
upgrading investment, reduced sickness absence, an optimum level of productivity and
improved comfort levels. Individuals respond very differently to their environments and the
research supports a correlation between worker productivity, well-being and environmental
comfort. The results illustrated that the occupants who report a high level of dissatisfaction
about their job are usually the people who suffer more work- and office environment-related
illnesses which affect their well-being, but not always so. There is a connection between
dissatisfied staff and low productivity; and a good sense of well-being is very important as
it can lead to substantial productivity gain. Well-being expresses overall satisfaction. If the
environment is particularly bad, people will be dissatisfied irrespective of job satisfaction.
Comfort should be viewed in the context of well-being and hence links the quality of the
indoor environment with employee productivity. Well-being is not concerned only with
personal health. It is how you feel about yourself and your family as well as your surroundings.
Ability and motivation are factors which require a stable and stimulated mind besides the
drive to perform. Clearly these factors can be influenced by indoor environment.
Sensory pleasure indicates the sign of a stimulus; it is transient, and motivates behaviour.
It has been shown experimentally that the wisdom of the body leads organisms to seek
pleasure and avoid displeasure, and thus achieve behaviours which are beneficial to the
subject’s mind and body (Cabanac, 1971, 1997). Pleasure indicates a positive stimulus and
serves both to reward behaviour and to provide the motivation for eliciting behaviour that
optimises psycho-physiological processes. A sensitive and qualitative working environment
which provides occupants with these stimuli increases the likelihood that motivation and
performance will be at a high level.
There is a need to develop an empirical model to enable greater understanding of multi-
sensory well-being of occupants under realistic dynamic working conditions, and to develop
a correlation between productivity, well-being, and multi-sensory occupant comfort. Most
work concentrates on thermal comfort for groups of people, but this is unrealistic as a basis
of environmental design because productivity depends on the accumulated efforts of
individuals. This alternative holistic approach will enable standards to be evolved which are
realistic and recognise the combined value of low energy, health, comfort and productivity in
various situations. It recognises the responses of the senses as a whole and does not focus
exclusively on thermal factors.
The individual responses illustrated that the office physical environment has a direct
influence on the health, well-being and productivity of occupants, and a properly designed
working place with good-quality lighting, comfort conditions and a stimulating environment
can invigorate the minds and inspire the occupants to excel in their performance.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support and assistance given by
Clearvision International Ltd, Optimum Work Place Ltd, Canary Wharf Management Ltd
and Jardinierie Interiors Ltd to carry out this research project, and would also like to thank
the staff at Richard Ellis Ltd for participating in the questionnaire survey; Dr Jagit Singh of
Oscar Faber Ltd for help with biological sampling, Professor Saaty of Pittsburgh University
for assessing our work with AHP and Li Baizhan for his doctoral work on AHP.
References
Barbatano, L. (1994) Home Indoor Pollution: A Contribution for an Economic Assessment,

Proceedings of Healthy Air, ’94 Conference, Milan pp. 395–402.
Cabanac, M. (1971) Physiological role of pleasure. Science, 173, 1103–1107.
Cabanac, M. (1997) Pleasure and joy and their role in human life, Workplace Comfort Forum,
London.
Chalmers, D.J. (1997) The puzzle of conscious experience. Scientific American Special Issue,
‘Mysteries of the Mind’, Jan. 30–37.
Clements-Croome, D.J. (1997) Naturally Ventilated Buildings. London: E & FN Spon.
Clements-Croome, D.J. and Li, B. (1995) Impact of indoor environment on productivity.
Workplace Comfort Forum, Royal Institute of British Architects, London.
Cohen, J. and Cohen, P. (1983) Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the
Behavioural Sciences, Hillsdale, NJ and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Collins, J.G. ( 1989) Health characteristics by occupation and industry: United States 1983–
1985. Vital Health and Statistics 10(170), Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health
Statistics.
Cooper, C.L. (1988) Occupational Stress Indicator Management Guide. Windsor: NFER Nelson.
Cooper, C.L. (1995) Personal communication, University of Manchester Institute of Science
and Technology.
Cooper, C.L. and Robertson, I.T. (1990) International Review of Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, vol. 9. Wiley.
Croome, D.J. and Roberts, B.M. (1981) Airconditioning and Ventilation of Buildings. Oxford:
Pergamon.
Ellis, R. (1994) Tomorrow’s Workplace, a Survey for Richard Ellis by The Harris Research
Centre.
Donnini, G., Van Hiep Nguyen and Moline, J. (1994) Office thermal environments and occupant
perception of comfort. La Riforma Medica, 109, Suppl. 1 (2), 257–263.
Holcomb, L.C. and Pedelty, J.F. (1994) Comparison of employee upper respiratory absenteeism
costs with costs associated with improved ventilation. ASHRAE Trans., 100(2), 914–920.
Ilgen, D.R. and Schneider, J. (1991) Performance measurement: a multi-discipline view.
International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, vol. 6, Cooper, C.L. and
Robertson (eds), 71–108, Wiley.
Kroner, W.M. and Stark-Martin, J.A. (1992) Environmentally responsive work stations and
office worker productivity. Workshop on Environment and Productivity, June (contact
Department of Architecture, Rensselaer University, Troy, NY).
Leaman, A. (1994) Dissatisfaction and office productivity. The Facilities Management Association
of Australia, Annual Conference, Sydney.
Leaman, A. (1997) Probe 10, bench marks for better buildings, Build. Serv. J., May.
Lehto, M. (1997) Decision making, in Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics (ed.
Salvendy, G.), section 37.3.4.2. Wiley Interscience.
Li, B., Croome, D.J. and Yao, R. (1996) Analytic hierarchy process model for assessing priority
indoor environmental factors influencing well-being of occupants in the offices. 7th

International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate, 21–26 July, Nagoya, Japan.
Li, B. (1998) Assessing the Influence of Indoor Environment on Productivity in Offices, PhD
thesis, University of Reading.
Li Baizhan (1996a) Assessing the Influence of Indoor Environment on Health, Well-being &
Productivity, Questionnaire For Environment Survey of Offices, The University of Reading,
UK.
Li Baizhan (1996b) Assessment of the Influence of Indoor Environment on Job Stress and
Productivity of Occupants in Offices, The University of Reading, UK.
Lomonaco, C. and Miller, D. (1997) Comfort and control in the work place. ASHRAE J., 39(9).
Lysaught, R.J. et al. (1989) Operator Workload: Comprehensive Review and Evaluation of
Operator Workload Methodologies (Analytic Tech. Rep. 2075–3). Alexandria, VA: US Army
Research Institute for Behavioural and Social Sciences.
Mehrabian, A. and Russell, J. (1974) An Approach to Environmental Psychology. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Meister, D. (1986) Human Factors: Testing and Evaluation. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Moray, N. et al. (1979) Final report of the Experimental Psychology Group. Mental Workload:
Its Theory and Measurement, ed. Moray, N., 101–114. New York: Plenum.
O’Donnell, R.D. and Eggemeier, F.T. (1986) Workload assessment methodology. Handbook of
Perception and Human Performance: Cognitive Processes and Human Performance, ed.
Boff, K.R. et al. New York: Wiley.
Oppenheim, A.N. (1992) Questionnaire Design, Interviewing and Attitude Measurement. London:
Pinter.
Oseland, N.A. (1996) Impact of the indoor environment on comfort and productivity. Workplace
Comfort Forum, London.
Pepler, R.D. and Warner, C.G. (1968) Temperature and learning; an experimental study. ASHRAE
Trans., 74, Part II.
Raw, G.J., Roys, M.S. and Leaman, A. (1990) Further findings from the office environment
survey: Productivity, Indoor Air ’90. 5th International Conference on Indoor Air Quality
and Climate, 1, 231–236.
Saaty, T.L. (1972) The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Saaty, T.L. (1988) Multicriteria Decision Making: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Pittsburgh,
PA.
Schweisheimer, W. (1962) Does air conditioning increase productivity? Heating Vent. Eng.,
35(419), 669.
Schen, Q. and Lo, K.K. (1997) A prioritisation method for planned maintenance. Proceedings
of Building Surveying Conference, Hong Kong Institute of Surveyors, Hong Kong, 1–10.
Sutermeister, R.A. (1976) People and Productivity. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Thorndike, R.L. (1949) Personnel Testing. New York: Wiley.
Weiner, P. (1994) Architectural Record, May.
Wilson, S. and Hedge, A. (1987) The Office Environment Survey. London: Building Use Studies
Ltd.
Wyon, D.P. (1992) Healthy buildings, barriers to productivity. Build. Serv. J., June.
Yao Runming, Liu Antian and Li Baizhan (1992) Application of the AHP method to the
planning of a solar house in China. Proceedings of Thermal Performance of the Exterior
Envelopes of Buildings V, Clearwater Beach, FL, 602–606.
Chapter 11
Productivity in buildings:
the ‘killer’ variables
Adrian Leaman and Bill Bordass
Introduction
This chapter deals with the somewhat vexing question of human productivity in the workplace.
It sets out to answer: ‘What features of workplaces under the control of designers and
managers significantly influence human productivity?’. The main theme is how individual
occupants are affected. We are seeking building or organisational features which most readily
improve or hinder human productivity. The findings can then be used in the brief-making,
design and management processes.
Observations are mainly based on surveys carried out since 1985 in the UK by Building
Use Studies and William Bordass Associates, together with new and spin-off projects from
the Building Research Establishment and UK Department of Environment among others.
Some of this work has been published before, but the bulk of data collected remains to be
analysed and reported on in greater detail.
There is also a substantial wider literature, much of it from the US, reviewed by Lorsch
and Abdou (1994a, 1994b, 1994c) and Oseland (1996). Quite a lot is known about how well
people respond to different conditions of temperature, humidity, lighting, ventilation and
noise, for example, and regulations for building design are based on many of the findings
(although with a considerable time lag).
Most of these studies come from military, industrial and commercial sources. Their
findings can be contradictory (although there is a reasonable consensus on key points) and
sometimes they can be hard to make sense of when productivity is linked to the indoor
environment. For instance, Pepler and Warner (1968) found that young people worked best
(and were thus more productive) for short periods when they were uncomfortably cold.
Periods of relatively uncomfortable arousal can thus be important. It is unlikely that people
will continue to perform well in conditions of prolonged discomfort. De Dear et al. (1993)
showed that large numbers of office staff considered their working environments to be
168 Leaman and Bordass
thermally unacceptable despite measured conditions falling within industry-standard comfort

envelopes, so perceived and measured conditions can be different. De Dear et al. (1993) also
demonstrated that 23.5°C is the temperature which people in offices prefer, but even with
this there is a sizeable minority of about 35 per cent who wanted it to be warmer or cooler,
so minority needs cannot be ignored.
Human productivity in workplaces is fraught with difficulty because:
• studies of individual occupants often miss the wider context of differences between
buildings, and their operational and managerial circumstances
• buildings and their occupying organisations are rarely even similar to each other from
case to case, which complicates comparisons
• methodological and interpretational problems result from the above and lead to begged
questions about assumptions and spurious detail, so it can be difficult to filter out the
most important points from case to case
• people behave differently in groups.
On balance, we prefer the approach of ‘real-world research’ (Robson, 1993) which deals
with human activities in their real contexts. This involves smaller surveys (10–15 buildings
is ideal), controlling for context through a thorough understanding of prevailing circumstances,
detailed occupant, technical and energy surveys, based on Building Use Studies occupant
questionnaires and EARM (Energy Assessment and Reporting Methodology) techniques,
intensive peer group review and quality control, and reporting based on the ‘exception
proving the rule’ (that is, finding the most benign energy case and the happiest occupants and
understanding thoroughly why this happens). Laboratory experiments and statistical tests
based on experimental designs often try to isolate cause and effects, but in so doing can over-
simplify or interfere with the behaviour of the study group. A celebrated example is that
people who have greater control over their indoor environment are more tolerant of wider
ranges of temperature. Theory based on laboratory tests in climate chambers seemingly
understates this effect, which is context-dependent (Bunn, 1993).
Buildings are complex systems made up of physical and human elements and their many
associations, interactions, interfaces and feedbacks. Elements and interactions create
‘emergent’ properties (those like aesthetic qualities which are greater than the sum of their
parts and consequently harder to pin down). Because of interdependencies, it is often
fruitless to try to separate out different variables and treat them as ‘independent’, as many
statistical methods require. Characteristics such as depth of space from wall to wall, open-
plan space and air-conditioning all depend on each other to a greater or lesser extent. As a
result, they produce cat’s cradles of statistical interdependencies which can be impossible to
disentangle causally. Feedback loops also add to the complex dynamics.
The ‘killer’ variables 169
As well as physical complexity, designers, managers and occupiers also have different
preferences, priorities and personal agendas. Changing circumstances add to the richness and
dynamism of contexts, but also make them less yielding to conventional analysis. Although
it is tempting to seek out general theories governing behaviour in buildings (and enshrine
principles in design guidance and building legislation), in practical terms constraints imposed
by contexts frequently turn out to be more important for the designer, manager or occupier.
Contexts – locational, social, economic, technical and environmental – are always subtly
changing, and can sometimes have surprisingly direct effects on local situations. For example,
it can be baffling why two schools – identical in design and intake profiles and on adjacent
sites – should differ markedly in vandalism damage rates. This can often be explained by
environmental strategies – especially with respect to the speed of repair of damage and the
extent to which particular individuals take responsibility for (‘own’) the problem of repair
(CIRIA, 1994).
This example might tempt a designer to say that management is the cause, not design.
However, as recent post-occupancy surveys show, buildings whose management strategy
has been developed from the outset of the design, with a clear understanding of client
requirements and management capacity, are more likely to perform better. Hence management
and design factors, like many others in buildings, depend on each other and cannot be
meaningfully isolated in real situations (see Leaman and Bordass (1997), many of whose
hypotheses are being verified in the Probe studies (Bordass et al., 1995b, 1996, 1997;
Standeven et al., 1995, 1996a, 1996b; Asbridge and Cohen, 1996; Standeven and Cohen,
1996; Cohen et al., 1996a, 1996b, 1997; Leaman, 1997; Leaman et al., 1997; Bordass and
Leaman, 1997)).
Designers and managers constantly strive to create conditions which bring out the best in
people and add value to investments and services. Occupants will also usually want to
achieve reasonable conditions for themselves. To complicate matters further, designers,
managers and occupiers can all behave perversely as well. For example, in a study of the top
floor of an office building we asked the occupants ‘Why do the lights always seem to be on
when you don’t need them, especially as the switches are easy to reach?’. The reply came:
‘We only do it to annoy the manager. He is obsessive about switching the lights off so we
switch them back on again when he goes out just to annoy him.’ More seriously, different
working groups in the same building can use the lighting to reinforce their team identity.
Too often, though, elements unwittingly interact and conspire to create unforeseen and
unwanted chronic problems. In the context of technology and its side-effects, Tenner (1996)
has memorably labelled these ‘revenge effects’. In buildings, technical elements often work
reasonably well in isolation or in theory, but when included as part of a wider system of
operation induce inefficiencies which ultimately affect the ability of people to perform their
work properly. These wider aspects of the design, use management and operation of buildings
concern us most here.
Terminology
By ‘productivity’ we mean the ability of people to enhance their work output through
increases in the quantity and/or quality of the product or service they deliver. Work output
is impossible to measure meaningfully for all building occupants. How do you compare, for
instance, the productivity of telephonists in a call centre with their managers? Our answer is
to use scales of perceived productivity, rather than measure productivity directly. The
question on productivity which has been incorporated into most Building Use Studies
questionnaires since the pioneering Office Environment Survey (Wilson and Hedge, 1987) is
shown in Fig. 11.1.
On balance, advantages with perceived productivity scales outweigh disadvantages.
Advantages include:
• a single question covers the topic so it can be incorporated in surveys with wider
objectives (although we find that building managers are still wary of the question and
sometimes forbid us to use it)
• the question is common to all respondents so that fair comparisons can be made
between most of them
• it can be incorporated in questionnaires across different building types (although strict
comparability between types may need to be treated circumspectly, for example
between teachers and administrative staff in a school where working conditions are
slightly different between the two)
• large samples may be surveyed relatively cheaply
• benchmarks of averages or medians may be used to assess how occupants’ perceptions
in individual buildings score against the complete dataset
• data analysis and verification are easier across large samples in many different buildings.
Please estimate how you think your productivity at work is increased or decreased by the
environmental conditions in the building. Please tick one point on the scale
Figure 11.1 Perceived productivity question used in Building Use Studies surveys
Disadvantages are:
• the nagging doubt that perceived productivity as measured may not associate well with
the actual productivity of the occupants (although many agree on the key point that
perceived and actual productivity are strongly associated (see the review of sources in
Oseland, 1996, 1997))
• the need for occupants to judge their own reference point when answering the question
(they sometimes want to know ‘Productivity with respect to what?’)
• the possible effects of context and other ruling factors at the time of the survey, for
example, rumours of possible redundancies.
Objectives
The main objectives of the productivity parts of post-occupancy and diagnostic studies are
to:
• give designers and managers indications of the main factors within their control that
might influence human productivity at work
• help prepare design and management strategies which measurably aim to improve
performance for organisations and individuals without compromising individuals’ needs
and introducing unhelpful side-effects.
Our emphasis is always on appropriate design and management strategies – as expressed in

the design briefing process and troubleshooting studies – and the major risk factors affecting
productivity. We are not attempting a ‘theory’ of productivity at work, nor a detailed
analysis of cause and effect or costs and payoffs.
‘Killer’ variables
A ‘killer’ variable – to use hyperbole from the language of computing – has a critical influence
on the overall behaviour of a system. With the present state of knowledge we can guesstimate
that losses (or gains) of up to 15 per cent of turnover in a typical office organisation might
be attributable to the design, management and use of the indoor environment. Fifteen per
cent gains/losses as a ballpark figure crops up in the work of Brill (1986) and Vischer (1989),
for example. Lorsch and Abdou (1994a, 1994b, 1994c) talk about the productivity of 20 per
cent of office workers in the USA being raised simply by improved indoor air quality. Data
from the Probe studies show perceived differences of up to 25 per cent between comfortable
and uncomfortable staff, with uncomfortable staff showing consistently lower productivity
(as common sense predicts – unless the arousal mechanism is more important) (Leaman,
1997). The difference gets narrower as overall satisfaction with the building improves.
Whatever the actual figures (no-one knows, of course), there is consensus that indoor
environment factors improve output, as well as a lot of evidence to show associations with
a cluster of related factors such as perceived health, comfort, and satisfaction. There are also
data to show that some of the management, design and use characteristics which improve
perceptions of individual welfare also contribute towards better energy efficiency, thereby
closing the loop on a potential ‘virtuous’ circle (Bordass et al., 1995a; Oseland, 1997).
This said, there are not many grounds for optimism, because the vast majority of occupied
buildings do not exhibit such self-reinforcing qualities and many are unmanageably complex
(Bordass et al., 1995b). From the perspective adopted here – that of strategic guidance for
building designers, managers and occupiers – it is sufficient to know simply that there are
positive and negative relationships between indoor environmental factors and human
productivity. The question then becomes: Which are the most important?
Important factors – the ‘killer’ variables – have been arranged here into four ‘clusters’.
Each represents a group of features which have more connections among themselves than
with others. There are also connections between the four: as we have implied, there is no
such thing as an independent variable in a building! Their relative importance also depends
on prevailing circumstances – the stage of the design process, for example. We have not
prioritised here, because contexts and interconnectedness alter in different situations, changing
priorities as well.
The clusters are:
• Personal control
• Responsiveness
• Building depth
• Workgroups.
Personal control
Research work in the 1980s into what was then called ‘sick building syndrome’ (‘building-
related sickness’ is the preferred term now) confirmed to a new generation of researchers
what was already well known to an older one – that people’s perception of control over their
environment affects their comfort and satisfaction. Work on thermal comfort, notably that of
Humphreys and McIntyre in the 1970s (Humphreys, 1976, 1992; McIntyre, 1980), has
shown that the range of temperatures that building occupants reported as ‘comfortable’ was
wider in field studies than in controlled conditions in the laboratory. People were more
tolerant of conditions the more control opportunities – switches, blinds and opening windows,
for instance – were available to them.
Similar results on the relationships between perceived control and sickness symptoms
have been reported by, for example, Raw et al. (1993). More recently, in studies on heart
disease in civil servants, higher incidence of heart attacks seem to be related to people’s
perception of control over their work (Marmot, 1997). There are many other such examples,
including the renewed interest in the 1990s in adaptive comfort (Baker, 1996).
Table 11.1 shows results for office workers in 11 UK buildings examined by Building Use
Studies in 1996–97. Self-assessed productivity is significantly associated with perceptions
of control in 7 out of 11 buildings. Perceptions of control are measured by the average of five
variables for perceived control over heating, cooling, lighting, ventilation and noise. Figure
11.2 shows that the relationship in Table 11.1 probably gets weaker as buildings get better
– as overall satisfaction gets better there is less need for discomfort alleviation. However,
buildings which are designed to provide comfort but do not deliver it (through technical,
Table 11.1 Relationships between control and perceived productivity for office workers
in eleven UK buildings surveyed in 1996–97
Building Type Average Spearman’s rho p value Significant

overall (corrected for ties) association
percentile between mean between
control and perceived
productivity productivity and
mean control?
A AC 52 0.12 0.4133
B AC 43 0.17 0.0043 Yes
C NV 81 0.08 0.4469
D NV 12 0.34 0.0348 Yes
E NV 66 0.30 0.1546
F AC 67 0.31 0.0053 Yes
G MM 91 0.24 0.0425 Yes
H ANV 43 0.49 0.0002 Yes
I ANV 22 0.35 0.0033 Yes
J NV 54 0.16 0.0031 Yes
K NV 74 0.07 0.6356
Interpretation
Buildings: 11 studied by Building Use Studies in 1996–97 for which productivity data are available.
Type: AC = air-conditioned; NV = conventional naturally ventilated; MM = mixed mode; ANV = advanced
natural ventilation. Average overall percentile: average from percentile score for seven variables from
BUS dataset (see Bordass et al. (1996) for further details).
Spearman’s rho: Correlation between scores for individual occupants between the mean of five perceived
control variables (mean control – heating, cooling, lighting, ventilation, noise) and perceived productivity
(see also Fig. 11.1).
p value: p values less than 0.05 indicate a significant association.
Interpretation: The ‘average overall percentile’ is a measure utilising seven summary variables from
the Building Use Studies dataset of 50 buildings. The average percentile score (built from individual
percentiles for each of the seven variables) shows how a particular building scores relative to all
others. A percentile score of 50 is in the middle of the range. The best buildings – those with higher
percentiles – tend to have lower correlation coefficients. The association is verging on significance
(p = 0.06 for rho), and quite strong (rho = -0.58). A larger sample of buildings will help test this more
thoroughly.
Figure 11.2 Relationship between perceived control and productivity decline as buildings
perform better
management or usability problems) tend to come out badly.

Table 11.2 shows that of the five perceived control variables – heating, cooling,
lighting, ventilation and noise – the last, noise, is most strongly associated with
perceived productivity, but the relationship is quite weak. Even so, perceived control
over lighting is the only one that is not significant.
Tables 11.1 and 11.2 and Fig. 11.2 tell a stark statistical story about personal
control and productivity. Building users in their personal comments on questionnaires
are much more forthcoming. In study after study, people say that lack of environmental
control is their single most important concern, followed by lack of control over noise.
Taking one typical comment from many in the same vein from a building study carried
out in 1996: ‘Noise has the most disturbing effect on my work. Other factors such as
heat and light are not so disrupting.’ Many people, some almost instinctively, oppose
the idea of open-plan working because they immediately suspect that they will lose
Table 11.2 Associations between perceived control and productivity for eleven study
buildings and five perceived control variables
Spearman’s rho p value Significant

(corrected for ties) association?
Heating 0.10 0.0001 Yes

Cooling 0.08 0.0001 Yes
Lighting 0.03 0.2513
Ventilation 0.06 0.0001 Yes
Noise 0.12 0.0001 Yes
Interpretation: Given that perceptions of mean control are related to productivity, which of the five
variables making up the mean control statistic are most important? This table shows that noise produces
the strongest association with productivity, significant but relatively weak. Heating is the next strongest.
Control over lighting is not significant. The order of these variables tends to confirm earlier work by
Building Use Studies which showed that lighting, which is the easiest to change in a building, also is the
least effective in its impact! [Editor’s note: if lighting variables other than level could be changed (e.g., a
vector-scalar ratio, daylight factor, colour, temperature) the result might be different.]
control and privacy and it will become more noisy. This might not necessarily actually
happen in practice, but people suspect that it will.
In spite of the wealth of research and occupier evidence that high perceptions of personal
control bring benefits such as better productivity and improved health, designers, developers,
and sometimes even clients seem remarkably reluctant to act on it. There are many reasons
for this, including the absence of thorough cost-in-use analysis in the calculation of future
payoffs (and the problem of who actually receives the benefit), but four are prominent.
1. Environmental control operates at the interface between a building’s physical and

technical systems and its human occupants, or, less visibly, automatically and often
under the supervision of computer-controlled building management systems. Perhaps
seduced by the promise of technology rather than its delivered performance, designers
assign more functions to automatic control than are usually warranted and, knowingly
or not, make the interfaces obscure. They then often do not seem to make clear to the
client the management implications of the technology, and whether these are acceptable
to them. Simpler and more robust systems are required, with greater opportunities for
users to intervene – especially for opportunities to override existing settings, better
feedback on what is supposed to be happening and whether or not the system is
actually working (Leaman and Bordass, 1997).
2. Building design is split into architectural and building services tasks, often with
suprisingly little integration between them. Poor attention to detail in building controls
is a common symptom of an incomplete design and specification process and gaps
between areas of professional responsibility. As well as a lack of recognition of the
problems here, there is also an absence of tools for specification and briefing, and a lack
of suitable standard componentry and systems. Manufacturers find it difficult to

invest in suitable new or modified products to meet such requirements, owing to a
diffuse market and a lack of well-articulated demand. Those who have tried have found
success elusive. For example, the promising environmentally advanced Colt window
system has recently been taken off the market as a complete package (Lloyd-Jones,
1994).
3. Designers do not fully appreciate the important difference between comfort provision
and discomfort alleviation. For example, the ability to alter workstation position – a
seemingly trivial feature – can be crucial to office users’ comfort. By making tiny
changes to their immediate environment to avoid the worst effects of (say) glare from
the winter sun, or down draughts, occupants can turn intolerable conditions into
marginally tolerable ones without management intervention. Most control adjustments
will be at margins of discomfort, triggered by something experienced as uncomfortable,
rather than in anticipation. The absence of this capability to fine-tune, especially in
space-planned offices with fixed furniture systems and little or no user control, can
make the difference between tolerable comfort and dissatisfaction.
4. Sadly, few building occupiers are motivated enough to gain control of systems which
are troublesome.
Responsiveness
To many people, the relationship between better personal control and human performance
is common sense; so too is the cluster of variables related to responsiveness. Many of the
buildings which work well in post-occupancy studies appear to have the capability to meet
people’s needs very rapidly either in anticipation or as they arise. This applies to personal
control, but it also works at other levels: the ability to reconfigure furniture, for example, or
adaptability of spaces to accommodate change, or speed of response to complaints by the
facilities management department.
The importance of responsiveness first became blindingly clear to us in a study in 1992
which included One Bridewell Street, Bristol (Energy Efficiency Office, 1991; Building Use
Studies Ltd, 1992/93) revisited by Joanna Eley in 1996. This building is noteworthy because,
although air-conditioned, it uses little more energy than a good-practice, naturally-ventilated,
open-plan office. In addition, occupant satisfaction is unusually high. Was this just coincidence
or is something more profound at work?
At One Bridewell Street high occupant satisfaction seemed to be related to the speed with
which the facilities management department dealt with complaints of discomfort: the response
was exceptionally fast, and occupants were told exactly what the outcome was. The facilities
manager also learned to anticipate common problems and to deal with them, often before
anyone noticed. Personal control for the occupants was not high, with just infrared ‘zappers’
for the lights and limited ability to change workstation position.
To test the possible influence of response time, a new variable was added to the Building
Use Studies questionnaire in 1995 (Fig. 11.3). The relationship between perceived speed of
response to complaints and perceived productivity is shown in Fig. 11.4 and people’s
perception of ‘quickness’ (the speed with which occupants think that heating, cooling,
lighting, ventilation and noise needs are met) in Table 11.3.
With the usual interpretational caveats relating to small, non-random samples, the results
in Figs 11.4 and 11.5 and Table 11.3 are strong grounds for developing this line of analysis
further. The association between speed of response and productivity in Fig. 11.4 is positive
and significant. Eight out of eleven buildings in Table 11.3 show significant positive
associations between perceived quickness of response and perceived productivity. Figure
11.5 indicates that, just like perceived control, the strength of correlation between quickness
and productivity increases as the buildings’ overall performance decreases. An obvious
conclusion from this is that quickness and control are also strongly and significantly associated,
and this indeed is the case (for individuals rho = 0.60, p = 0.0001; for building means rho =
0.75, p = 0.0125).
Response to problems
Figure 11.3 Response time question used in Building Use Studies surveys
Interpretation: The horizontal axis shows the percentage of staff complaining about
heating, cooling and ventilation systems who thought that the speed of response by
management was satisfactory (a score of over 5 on a seven-point scale). The vertical
axis has the perceived productivity for all the staff in the building (including those who
did not complain). Perceived productivity and perceived speed of response are
significantly associated.
Figure 11.4 Relationship between perceived speed of response in dealing with heating,
lighting and ventilation complaints and perceived productivity for twelve study
buildings
As measures of response time and personal control are themselves related, are we
dealing with two sides of the same coin? To some extent, yes, because responsive
control delivers rapid response by definition. But in some buildings a lack of individual
control facilities is more than compensated by the excellence of the facilities management
arrangements.
Conversely, if designers try to add control in a complicated building which already
lacks management resource then their efforts may well be defeated as there will be an
inability to manage the added complexity which will induce further chronic failures.
Most buildings tend to have poor levels of perceived control because they also have
relatively low levels of building management: it has been incorrectly assumed at briefing
and design stages that building services technology will automatically deliver what the
occupants require without undue extra management intervention or, alternatively, that
management will be superhuman.
As the Probe studies show, these assumptions are wrong. The buildings that came
out best overall either managed technological complexity with high levels of expertise
(e.g. Bordass et al., 1995a) or deliberately rid themselves of gratuitous complexity
Interpretation: See also Tables 11.1 and 11.3, and Fig. 11.2. As buildings get better
(vertical axis), the relationship between perceived quickness and perceived
productivity seemingly weakens. This scatter is approaching significance but is
not significant. A larger sample would clarify this either way.
Figure 11.5 Relationship between perceived quickness and perceived productivity
Table 11.3 Relationships between quickness and perceived productivity for office workers
in eleven UK buildings surveyed in 1996–97
Building Type Average Spearman’s rho p value Significant

overall (corrected for association
percentile ties) between between perceived
mean quickness productivity and
and productivity mean quickness?
A AC 52 0.25 0.0433 Yes

B AC 43 0.32 0.0001 Yes
C NV 81 0.01 0.9084
D NV 12 0.27 0.0961
E NV 66 0.40 0.0805
F AC 67 0.35 0.0025 Yes
G MM 91 0.23 0.0274 Yes
H ANV 43 0.56 0.0001 Yes
I ANV 22 0.44 0.0004 Yes
J NV 54 0.19 0.0005 Yes
K NV 74 0.35 0.0176 Yes
Interpretation: See Table 11.1 for definitions. Column 4 has Spearman’s rho for mean quickness and
perceived productivity. Mean quickness, like mean control, is a composite variable made up from
respondents’ perceived view of the ‘quickness’ with which heating, lighting, cooling, ventilation and noise
control meet their needs.
(e.g. Standeven et al., 1996b) and a dependence on management.

So designers and managers should consider both personal control and response time
implications, rather than think that they are the same. Building Use Studies (unpublished
post-occupancy study) finds that when something goes wrong occupants give building
managers the benefit of the doubt for a honeymoon period of up to three days, then get
upset or give up!
The implication is that real-time responsiveness is something to be considered in the
briefing and specification processes, and that different response time standards could be
set for different occupier needs. For example, glare and severe overheating need to be dealt
with and corrected immediately, whereas a three-day threshold could be used for the
replacement of components which directly affect interfaces – simple things such as blinds,
chairs, luminaires.
Building depth
The third cluster is building depth. The crucial depth-of-space threshold is some 15 m
from wall to wall, around the normal limit of natural ventilation. In the past, we have found
that:
• the deeper buildings get, overall satisfaction and productivity tend to go down
• a depth of about 12 m across the building seems about optimal for human performance
variables
• shallower plan forms tend to cost about £50/m2 more, assuming similar cost levels
per unit area of envelope and for building services. However, shallower-plan buildings
may lend themselves to cheaper, more domestic envelope construction and cheaper
services. Unfortunately, cost calculations often find it difficult to consider such
trade-offs; economic calculations tend to be more precise at minimising envelopeto-
floor area ratios than building services costs, about which they tend to be less well
informed (William Bordass Associates, 1992).
Looking at differences in perceived productivity between naturally ventilated (i.e. less

than 15 m across) and air-conditioned buildings (usually, but not always, deeper than 15
m) in the current Building Use Studies dataset, the mean perceived productivity is minus
0.19 per cent for NV and minus 4.25 for AC (p = 0.0097). This comparison is based on 40
buildings, but does not include either mixed-mode or advanced naturally-ventilated, which
are harder to classify by depth.
This does not necessarily mean that naturally-ventilated buildings are better than air-
conditioned ones. The pointers are that occupants prefer natural ventilation as the default
– in winter, spring and autumn – and air-conditioning, not surprisingly, in the hot, humid
parts of summer (Nicol and Kessler, 1998; Oseland et al., 1997). Depth of space is also a
correlate for other variables which affect human performance. Many of these have been
assessed, although not necessarily in working buildings or conclusively. They include:
• occupants’ preferences for window seats (studies usually show that people with
window seats tend to be more comfortable (e.g. Nicol and Kessler, 1998; Figure
11.6), but this effect tends to decrease as overall building performance improves
(Bordass et al., 1995a)
• ill-health, with the statistical association of chronic, building-related ill-health
symptoms (such as dry eyes or stuffy nose), with larger buildings leading to wider
speculation about the role of air conditioning as a cause (Wilson and Hedge, 1987).
Building depth is also a correlate for complexity. Buildings have allometric (size) properties
which make them disproportionately more complicated as they get bigger. This is a matter
not just of building services such as mechanical ventilation and air-tempering, which are
always needed with depths greater than 15 m, but also of spatial and behavioural complexity
– there are many more activities and much greater likelihoods of conflicts in bigger
Interpretation: This comes from a survey of six London office buildings carried out by Building Use
Studies Ltd for a private client in 1991. The horizontal axis shows the percentage proportion of staff with
window seats; the vertical axis the mean scores for overall dissatisfaction on a 5-point scale (a method
now discontinued on surveys). For these six buildings, there is a significant and strong relationship: the
greater the number of staff with window seats, the less dissatisfaction.
Figure 11.6 Dissatisfaction and window seats

floorplates with higher populations, and a higher dependence on technology and

management.
Katsikakis and Laing (1993) is a rare example of a study that measures actual occupational
densities, and compares them with design densities. A selection of London offices have
been measured for occupied densities, which turn out almost invariably lower than design
densities, some substantially so (these findings have more recently been confirmed with a
bigger sample by Gerald Eve Research and RICS (1997)). Figure 11.7 is a secondary
analysis of data in Katsikakis and Laing (1993) (excluding two buildings with very low
occupant densities). It shows how the measured-to-design density proportion varies
significantly with both the amount of primary circulation space and the amount of support
space. The more primary circulation and support there is, the higher is the measured-to-
actual ratio (i.e. the measured density of staff drops with more circulation and support
space).
Does this mean that occupiers are compensating for greater complexity by being much
more generous with floorspace, or are standards just going up, so that office staff are
Interpretation: This is a secondary analysis of data first published by Katsikakis and Laing (1993).
Two buildings with extremely low densities have been removed from the original dataset of 16
buildings.
Figure 11.7 Ratio of measured to design density by primary circulation and support
space for fourteen office buildings
getting the best of both worlds – lower densities and more support space? Unfortunately
we do not really know, and do not have productivity data to match with findings on
density. As with many other aspects of this tantalising subject, we need a little more
information!
Building depth introduces a double-edged effect. As buildings get bigger, they are able to
perform more functions and pack more people in, but the penalty is increased operational
complexity which creates a greater likelihood of failure – especially chronic performance
problems – which increases the cost of management to reduce relative risk. On the other
hand, people do not like working at high densities (with the exception, perhaps, of financial
dealers, who seem immune!), but higher densities are often perceived to be needed to ‘save’
on office costs. Katsikakis and Laing (1993) possibly show that when this trade-off is
made in reality, building users opt for lower densities because this gives them sufficient
degrees of freedom to deal with the consequences of dysfunctional conflicts. What do you
prefer: an aircraft with 70 per cent of the seats filled or completely full up?
Workgroups
The fourth variable cluster relates to workgroups: remarkably, along with personal control,
one of the least understood topics in modern buildings (Trickett, 1991). In offices,
perceptions of productivity are higher in smaller and more integrated workgroups. Like
control, this will be obvious from personal experience: given an unrestricted choice most
will opt for their own room, for instance, or a small workgroup with close colleagues. This
said, there are few research data to back it up and, like density and size, this variable needs
more work. For example, on the rare occasions when Building Use Studies has looked at
workgroup dynamics, productivity has not been measured as well (usually because the
client did not want to).
Table 11.4 has preliminary data from a rare case building where both productivity and
workgroup topics were studied. In this case, workgroup size could explain differences in
overall comfort (smaller is better), but there was no association between size of workteam
and overall perceived productivity for the individuals in the study building.
Our confidence in including workgroups as a killer variable comes from work in 1987
(Wilson and Hedge, 1987). Room size is a correlate of perceived control for temperature,
lighting and ventilation (Figs 11.8 and 11.9), with perceived control declining with
workgroups bigger than about five people. As perceived control is a correlate of perceived
productivity, it is fairly safe to assume that workgroup size is also a contributory factor
(but so are technical factors).
From a design and management point of view, workgroups are seen as desirable both for
space-saving reasons (possibly spurious, see above) and for better communication between
Table 11.4 Overall comfort scores by size of workteam for a single office building
DF Sum of squares Mean square f value p value
WKTEAM $ 5 1 11.76 11.76 5.63 .0183

Residual 302 631.24 2.09
Model II estimate of between-component variance:.06

52 cases were omitted due to missing values.
Count Mean Std Dev. Std Err.
Five or fewer 143 4.58 1.51 .13

Six or more 161 4.19 1.39 .11
52 cases were omitted due to missing values.
Interpretation: These are data for size of workteam for an office building studied in 1996. The analysis of
variance shows that workteams of fewer than four people were more comfortable than those with more
than four people. The analysis, though, does not take account of any possible effects of grade.
Interpretation: These data are from the Office Environment Survey (Wilson and Hedge, 1987)
showing means of values for perceived control for lighting, ventilation and temperature. The OES
used a sample of 50 UK office buildings.
Figure 11.8 Size of working group and perceived control no. 1
colleagues. There is always a trade-off to be considered between the risk of degrading

performance in open plan and cutting people off from each other by putting them in their
own rooms. Designers and managers both tend to opt for the open plan approach, but for
different reasons. The evidence we have indicates (but does not prove!) that well-integrated
Figure 11.9 Size of working group and perceived control no. 2
workgroups of four to five people will probably be acceptable, but the risks of lower
productivity in bigger workgroups can increase substantially thereafter. To support
the claimed business benefits it is therefore necessary to put in a much higher level of
expertise in building and services design, and facilities management. While we all know
this to some extent, the degree of improvement necessary can be much higher than one
would think.
A key reason for this is the ‘mapping’ between the workgroup’s activities, the
available environmental controls and zones of services. Where the relationship is one-
to-one (i.e. everything coincides as it should in a single room), the sole occupant will
have full control over lighting, blinds, ventilation, heating, cooling, privacy and noise,
and is able to fine-tune to suit needs exactly. Here there will be perceived productivity
benefits for the occupant, who will be able to prevent undesirable impacts such as
distracting noise or overheating. Supervising managers may be rather less keen on
individuals with high levels of privacy and productive interactions may also be reduced,
but modern technology is permitting close work integration with less face-to-face
contact.
As workgroups get larger, three characteristics affect the occupants, as follows:
1. The mapping between environmental controls, services zones and activities

disintegrates (for example, the lighting may be switched for the whole floor
rather than for workgroups alone).
2. Occupants have to consider their colleagues’ wishes when they want to make
changes. As a result, the likelihood that everyone will be satisfied with the
prevailing settings will reduce as the workgroups get bigger. This is an inevitable
consequence of (a) size and allometry; (b) differences in individual preference
ranges.
3. Long-distance effects become important: for instance, glare from a remote window,
possibly even through a glass partition, or draughts of uncertain origin owing to
complex movements of air in both naturally ventilated and air-conditioned spaces.
The best strategies for the designer and managers are thus to:
• keep workgroups as small and well-integrated as possible

• make sure that zones of activities map onto the service zones especially for
productivity killers such as irrelevant noise, glare and draughts
• keep sources of unwanted distraction to a minimum – we have found that up to
60 per cent of staff sitting in open plan offices can be located directly next to a
source of random distraction such as the end-doors which may squeak and bang
when closing, the photocopier or the tea/ coffee area
• not interfere with sources of wanted information, i.e., information that is needed
and relevant to worktasks within earshot and lines of sight, so that people receive
reinforcing, relevant data by default
• design and manage the overall worksetting so that the default (i.e. normal) setting
is reasonably comfortable, safe and healthy and does not rely on excessive amounts
of technological or management input to make it work acceptably.
Conclusions
We have dealt with productivity in the workplace from the perspective of things
within the control of building designers and facilities managers. Necessarily this means
missing out aspects of productivity largely or entirely outside the influence of building
professionals. These include considerations such as workplace stress which we once
tested to see whether stress was building-related, and found that for most intents and
purposes it was not (Leaman et al., 1990), management attitudes and job satisfaction
(Whitley et al., 1996).
Although productivity begs many definitional and methodological questions, we
think that the available data tell a clear story which designers and managers can practically
incorporate. Buildings, especially offices, work best for human productivity when
there are:
• many opportunities for personal control, providing a background for healthy,

comfortable and safe operation as well as adaptive comfort
• a rapid response environment, not necessarily only for personal control, but for
the many other aspects of a building’s operation that might compensate for
absence of personal control, such as an excellent complaints monitoring and
feedback system
• shallow plan forms, preferably demanding less technically complex and less
management-intensive systems (with the added benefit of better energy
performance)
• activities which properly fit the services which are supposed to support them,
not only in spatial capacity, but for the zoning and control of heating, cooling,
lighting, ventilation, noise and privacy.
In some contexts, these will not be possible or desirable. This is perfectly acceptable,
but clients, designers and managers then need to appreciate the extra levels of core and
support services that will be needed to produce good performance.
Of course, like everything else with buildings, the attributes above are all really
aspects of the same thing. Ideally, simple, shallow plan forms, small work rooms,
robust and manageable controls and domestic levels of servicing work best. In fact,
Raw and Aizlewood (1996) show that building-related chronic illness was significantly
lower (and perceived comfort higher) in homes than in offices – just what would be
expected from our findings.
However, such ‘ideal’ design forms (characteristic of offices in the UK up to the
1960s) have long since been superseded. The relentless trend is now towards
intensification (and diversification) of building use (Leaman, 1996), with much greater
attention paid to:
• risk/value payoffs, not just in rental or property investment terms as in the past,
but for the wider canvas of human and environmental resources as well
• business benefits and consequential environmental disbenefits which have to be
managed if overall performance improvement is to be achieved
• design strategies linked far more closely to business missions to improve strategic
advantage in the market place
• greater interest in ‘generic’ spaces and forms of servicing which allow rapid
switching between different occupier activities.
Bigger and more complex buildings demand subtler strategies for managing this
complexity and different design strategies and technologies to support them. Where
this is successful, performance gains are possible, but where management does not
properly compensate for the extra diligence that technology needs, chronic problems
usually result.
The trend towards mixed-mode buildings (with mixtures of natural ventilation and
air-conditioning) is a case in point. Treating early findings from Probe and other recent
studies very circumspectly, it seems that mixed mode can offer the best of both worlds
– better occupant satisfaction and better environmental performance – and occupants
can detect the differences. Studies by Rowe and colleagues in Sydney (Rowe et al.,
1998 and personal communication) (Table 11.5) suggest that mixed-mode offices not
only give performance advantages through better thermal comfort and better perceived
ability to perform work (i.e. better productivity), but are also better for perceived air
quality and overall satisfaction with workplace. As with British studies, the work also
confirms that this delivers better perceived control and leads to much improved energy
efficiency. By monitoring the switching behaviour in mixed-mode buildings, Rowe has
shown that a control-rich, naturally-ventilated environment is the preferred default –
even in subtropical conditions in Australia – and this preference is abandoned only on
the minority of occasions when both temperature and humidity exceed tolerance
thresholds.
Although we can be upbeat and report these findings optimistically, we have also
tried to show where things work and where they don’t. Unfortunately, the design and
construction industries are much more coy, especially about failures. There is an
inclination, even in research and development agencies who should know better, towards
reporting just the good news and forgetting about the downsides, which often turn out
to be the very things that affect human productivity the most. Many of the issues we
Table 11.5 Performance means by ventilation type for twelve Australian office buildings
(Rowe, personal communication)
Ventilation Overall Impact on Thermal Air

type satisfaction. ability to comfort quality
with perform
workplace work
1 MM 4.0 3.7 3.5 3.4

2 AC 2.0 1.9 3.3 2.4
3 AC 3.5 3.4 3.1 3.2
4 AC 3.3 3.4 3.2 2.9
5 AC 2.6 2.8 2.6 2.5
6 AC 2.8 2.9 3.0 2.9
7 NV 3.1 3.3 2.7 3.1
8 AC 2.4 2.5 2.3 1.7
9 AC 3.0 3.1 2.9 2.3
10 AC 3.1 3.2 3.1 2.7
11 MM 3.7 3.7 4.4 4.0
12 NV 2.0 2.9 2.5 2.6
Notes
Performance means are for five-point scales: 1 = low; 3 = average; 5 = high. See also Fig. 11.2 for
ventilation types.
have dealt with in this paper have been known about for generations. Poor human productivity
in buildings is a function not just of our four ‘killer’ variables but also poor professional
feedback, lack of integration in design processes, lack of care for the primary occupants,
weak or non-existent briefmaking, and the convenient but disturbing tendency to forget the
bad news.
Our experience with monitoring and troubleshooting studies of UK buildings is that the
key to success with building performance lies with managing downsides effectively. Generally
this involves:
1. understanding contexts, especially by bringing ruling constraints to the fore at briefing

stage, and making sure that everyone shares assumptions early
2. identifying possible downsides and knowing risks for what they really are, so that we
are not ‘optimising the irrelevant’ (Bordass, 1992)
3. keeping technology within thresholds of affordable manageability, so that the inevitable
revenge effects can be identified and coped with before they develop into insidious
chronic defects
4. taking occupants’ complaints seriously and dealing with them quickly and sensitively.
References
Asbridge, R. and Cohen, R. (1996) Probe 4: Queen’s Building. Building Services J., Apr., 35–38.
Baker, N. (1996) The irritable occupant: recent developments in thermal comfort theory.
Architect. Res. Q., 2, winter.
Baker, N. and Standeven, M. (1995) Adaptive opportunity as a comfort parameter. Proceedings
of the Workplace Comfort Forum, London.
Bordass, W. (1992) Optimising the irrelevant. Building Services, 1992, Sept.
Bordass, W., Bromley, A. and Leaman, A. (1995a) Comfort, control and energy efficiency in
offices. BRE Information Paper, IP3/95, Garston.
Bordass, W., Bunn, R., Leaman, A. and Ruyssevelt, P. (1995b) Probe 1: Tanfield House. Building
Services J., Sept., 38–41.
Bordass, W., Cohen, R. and Standeven, M. (1997) Technical review of engineering and energy
issues: Probe office buildings. Buildings in Use ’97: how buildings really work, London.
Bordass, W., Field, J. and Leaman, A. (1996) Probe 7: Homeowner’s Friendly Society. Building
Services J., Oct., 39–43.
Bordass, W. and Leaman, A. (1997) From feedback to strategy. Buildings in Use ’97: how
buildings really work, London.
Brill, M. (1986) The Office as a Tool. The Buffalo Organisation for Social and Technological
Innovation (BOSTI).
Building Use Studies Ltd (1992/93) User and Automated Controls and Management of Buildings.
Building Use Studies Ltd, London, unpublished report for Building Research Establishment,
1992 (Phase 1), 1993 (Phase 2).

Building Use Studies Ltd (1996) Post-occupancy survey findings, unpublished, 1996. Unlike the
Probe studies, which are in the public domain, many other surveys, such as this one, are for
private clients only.
Bunn, B. (1993) Fanger: Face to Face. Building Services, June.
CIRIA (1994) Dealing with Vandalism, CIRIA Special Publication 91, Construction Industry
Research and Information Association, London, 31–32.
Cohen, R., Leaman, A., Robinson, D. and Standeven, M. (1996a) Probe 8: Anglia Polytechnic
University Learning Resource Centre. Building Services J., Dec., 27–31.
Cohen, R., Ruyssevelt, P., Standeven, M., Bordass, W. and Leaman, A. (1996b) The Probe
method of Investigation. CIBSE National Conference, Harrogate.
Cohen, R., Standeven, M. and Bordass, W. (1997) Technical review of engineering and energy
issues: Probe non-office buildings. Buildings in Use ’97: how buildings really work, London.
Davies, A. and Davies, M. (1995) The Adaptive Model of Thermal Comfort: patterns of correlation.
London: CIBSE.
De Dear, R. et al. (1993) A Field Study of Occupant Comfort and Office Thermal Environments
in a Hot–Humid Climate, Final report, ASHRAE RP-702.
Eley, J. (1996) Proving an FM point: One Bridewell Street. Facilities Management World, Sept.
Energy Efficiency Office (1991) Best Practice Programme: Good Practice Case Study 21: One
Bridewell Street, Bristol. Garston: BRESCU.
Gerald Eve Research and RICS (1997) Overcrowded, Under Utilised or Just Right?
Humphreys, Rev. M. (1976) Field studies of thermal comfort compared and applied. Building
Services Eng., 44, 5–27.
Humphreys, Rev. M. (1992) Thermal comfort in the context of energy conservation, in Roaf,
S. and Hancock, M. feds), Energy Efficient Building, 3–13. Oxford: Blackwell Scientific
Publications.
Katsikakis, D. and Laing, A. (1993) Assessment of Occupant Density Levels in Commercial
Office Buildings. London: Stanhope Properties.
Leaman, A. (1996) Space intensification and diversification, in Leaman, A. (ed.), Buildings in
the Age of Paradox, 44–59. IoAAS, University of York.
Leaman, A. (1997) Probe 10: Occupancy survey analysis, Building Services J., May, 21–25.
Leaman, A. and Bordass, W. (1995) Comfort and complexity: unmanageable bed-fellows?
Workplace Comfort Conference, London, 1995.
Leaman, A. and Bordass, W. (1997) Design for manageability, in Rostron, J. (ed.), Sick Building
Syndrome: concepts, issues and practice, 135–149, London.
Leaman, A., Bordass, W., Cohen R. and Standeven, M. (1997) The Probe occupant surveys.
Buildings in Use ’97: how buildings really work, London.
Leaman, A., Roys, M. and Raw, G. (1990) Further Findings from the Office Environment Survey:
Stress. BRE, Garston.
Lloyd-Jones, D. (1994) Windows of Change. Building Services, Jan.
Lorsch, H. and Abdou, O. (1994a) The impact of the building indoor environment on occupant
productivity: Part 1: Recent studies, measures and costs. ASHRAE Trans., 741–749.
Lorsch, H. and Abdou, O. (1994b) The impact of the building indoor environment on occupant
productivity: Part 2: Effects of temperature, ASHRAE Trans., 895–901.
Lorsch, H. and Abdou, O. (1994c) The impact of the building indoor environment on occupant
productivity: Part 3: Effects of indoor air quality, ASHRAE Trans., 902–912.
McIntyre, D. (1980) Indoor climate, 154. London: Applied Science Publishers.

Marmot, M. (1997) Report on perceived control over work, Br. Med. J., July.
Nicol, J. and Kessler, M. (1998) Perception of comfort, in relation to weather and indoor
adaptive opportunities, ASHRAE Trans., Jan.
Oseland, N. (1996) Productivity and the indoor environment, Fourth International Air Quality
Conference, Mid-Career College, London, 19.
Oseland, N. (1997) The relationship between energy efficiency and staff productivity. Building
Research Establishment internal CR90/97, Garston.
Oseland, N., Brown, D. and Aizlewood, C. (1997) Occupant satisfaction with environmental
conditions in naturally ventilated and air conditioned offices, CIBSE Mixed Mode Conference,
May.
Pepler, R. and Warner, R. (1968) Temperature and learning: an experimental study. ASHRAE
Trans., 74, 211–219.
Raw, G. and Aizlewood, C. (1996) The Home Environment Survey: a pilot study of acute health
effects in homes. Building Research Establishment, Garston, 109/1/3.
Raw, G., Roys, M. and Leaman, A. (1993) Sick building syndrome, productivity and control.
Property J., Aug.
Robson, C. (1993) Real World Research. Oxford: Blackwell.
Rowe, D., Forwood, B., Dinh, C. and Julian, W. (1998) Occupant Interaction with a Mixed Media
Thermal Climate Control System Improves Comfort and Saves Energy. AIRAH Meeting,
Sydney.
Standeven, M. and Cohen, R. (1996) Probe 5: Cable and Wireless College. Building Services J.,
June, 35–39.
Standeven, M., Cohen, R. and Bordass, W. (1995) Probe 2: 1 Aldermanbury Square, Building
Services J., Dec. 29–33.
Standeven, M., Cohen, R. and Bordass, W. (1996a) Probe 3: C&G Chief Office. Building
Services J., Feb. 31–34.
Standeven, M., Cohen, R. and Leaman. A. (1996b) Probe 6: Woodhouse Medical Centre. Building
Services J., Aug., 35–38.
Tenner, E. (1996) Why Things Bite Back: New technology and the revenge effect. London:
Fourth Estate.
Trickett, T. (1991) Workplace design: its contribution towards total quality. Facilities, 10, no.
9.
Vischer, J. (1989) Environmental Quality in Offices. New York: Van Nostrand Rheinhold.
Whitley, T., Dickson, D. and Makin, P. (1996) The contribution of occupational and organisational
psychology to the understanding of sick building syndrome, CIBSE/ASHRAE Joint National
Conference, Harrogate, 1996, 133–138.
William Bordass Associates (1992) Specification and Design for Building Depth, internal note.
Wilson, S. and Hedge, A. (1987) The Office Environment Survey. London: Building Use Studies.
Chapter 12
Individual control at each

workplace: the means and the
potential benefits
David P. Wyon
Introduction
We all have days when we feel that the office environment is reducing our productivity.
Whether the problem we experience is due to the lighting, noise, temperature, air quality or
some other physical factor; if we can’t change anything, the only remaining option is to
change everything by going to a different location to work. Even in the rare circumstance
when this is an option, it has many obvious disadvantages. Providing alternative locations
is expensive; books, papers and equipment at one location are not available at another;
moving between alternative locations takes time; and variable locations makes ‘teaming’
more difficult. Working at home requires either a rare degree of trust, or a shift toward
piecework accountability and ultimately self-employment, which suits only a tiny minority
of office workers. The best solution is a workplace where you can change something. In
this context, anything is better than nothing, and more is better. Indoor environmental
control is traditionally provided on a group basis. The problem is that individual differences
are such that a ‘good’ indoor environment is accepted as one where 80 per cent are
satisfied. The remaining 20 per cent are expected to endure conditions which may adversely
affect their work, their comfort, and their health. The solution is to provide some means of
individually adjusting each occupant’s microclimate. It will be shown that this is perfectly
possible, and very beneficial.
Following a general discussion of the degrees of freedom that are currently available to
office workers, the current consensus on acceptable levels of temperature and noise in
offices will be set out, taking account of recent experimental evidence for interactions
between these factors. New estimates of the range of individual control of temperature
required to ensure comfort for a given proportion of a group will be given, based on recent
experimental evidence. Estimates will then be made of the degree to which fan noise may be
increased to extend the range of individual thermal and air quality control, without negating
Individual control at each workplace 193
the purpose by increasing the overall percentage dissatisfied. Published research on

performance under cold and heat stress will be shown to be capable of predicting quite
accurately the beneficial effects of individual control on group average performance of
office work in a real-world situation in which one particular type of work could be identified
as critical for productivity.
However, even if environmental effects on the performance of specific types of office
task could be accurately predicted, it would still be difficult to predict the ‘bottom-line’
productivity of office workers. At lower levels in the job description hierarchy, the percentage
of an employee’s time spent on a given task may be known quite exactly. In very simple
job descriptions, such as copy-typing, it approaches 100 per cent. At levels only slightly
above this it becomes increasingly difficult to identify which tasks are being performed,
which are critical for productivity, and how much time is spent on each. Individual control
must then be assumed to benefit productivity if it is capable of providing optimal conditions
for individual comfort and health.
The need for individual control
User-initiated changes are made necessary by a large number of ‘drivers for change’.
Examples of these will be given, beginning with several that occur in the visual environment.
Visual information can be a stimulus or a distraction, yet visual information can be essential
for effective teaming. View-out through windows allows occupants to focus on distant
objects as well as near ones, helping them to avoid eye-strain. View-in and the consequent
lack of privacy can be stressful. The non-visual effects of any lighting arrangement are
positive or negative depending on the task, e.g. bright lighting raises levels of mental
arousal, which is fine for some tasks, but not for others. Daylight changes all the time, and
glare, direct or reflected, generally occurs only at certain times of day and with certain
materials, such as paper with a glossy finish.
Similarly, there are drivers for change in the acoustic environment. Auditory information
can be a stimulus or a distraction, yet it may be essential for effective teaming. The non-
informational effects of noise, i.e. those that are a function of noise level rather than of the
distracting effect of unwanted acoustic information, include an effect of noise on levels of
mental arousal. Noise increases arousal. Arousal affects occupants’ distribution of attention.
Cue-utilisation, or breadth of attention, is reduced at high levels of arousal. Thus noise, like
bright lighting, may or may not be beneficial for the task in hand.
Indoor air quality may also be a driver for change. Thresholds of irritation vary with
health and between people. Unwanted odour can be as distracting as noise. Episodic dust
contamination and periodic cleaning will alter the required clean air supply rate.
Indoor air temperatures can change occupant requirements. Thermal discomfort is very
194 Wyon
distracting. Mental performance is greatly reduced by moderate levels of heat stress, and
manual dexterity is measurably reduced even by moderate levels of cold stress. Even in
standard clothing, neutral temperatures vary between individuals over a 10 K range, and
differences between individuals’ clothing and activity levels have large effects on neutral
temperature. The intensity of many subclinical symptoms such as sick building syndrome
(SBS) is affected by air temperature, and this may also lead to a requirement for change.
Delegation of control
The means by which users are allowed to change something to cope with the above
‘drivers for change’ are not nearly as important as the principle that users should be
enabled and empowered to initiate change themselves. The more ‘degrees of freedom’
that can be designed into a workplace, the better. The principle of ‘bringing the user
back into the loop’ is far more important for health, comfort and productivity than
optimising uniform conditions to accord with group average requirements, yet indoor
environmental research has always concentrated on the group and ignored individual choice.
If users can optimise their own work environment in multiple ways, designers do not even
need to know what group average requirements are; it is sufficient to know the range that
is required on each dimension.
Delegation of control to users obviously means that they must take on some new
responsibilities. They must understand the way the building works and the consequences
of their actions, so they must be given insight. They must learn to use the control
delegated to them, and as learning cannot take place without feedback, they must be given
online information. Only when they have both insight and information can they be given
influence. The 3I principle of user empowerment is herewith formulated and states that
all three – insight, information, and influence – must be provided. Providing any one of
them, or even any two, will fail. This principle applies to a surprisingly wide range of
human activities, from indoor environmental optimisation to accident prevention in complex
systems.
Existing means of delegating control to the

individual
Task lighting is common in Europe, but less common in North American and Asian offices.
Access to view-out is a rare privilege of rank in many North American office buildings,
while it has been elevated almost to a human right in Scandinavian office design. Adjustable
solar shading should always accompany proximity to windows, but often does not.
Adjustable visual screening can make it possible to trade off view-out against view-in.
Provision of these four degrees of freedom addresses several of the drivers for change listed
above.
Doors which can be closed are really the only effective way of reducing the noise
problems listed above. However, in order to facilitate teaming, i.e. to signal accessibility
and allow view-in, office doors are often left open unless they are transparent. Glass doors
and internal walls, as used to admit daylight to core common areas in the combi offices
found in Sweden, resolve this conflict and restore the additional degree of freedom that
permits doors to be closed to reduce noise distraction. Combi offices incorporate a new
design concept that places small individual offices around an office building’s perimeter,
each with a window and a door. They have solid walls between them, but floor-to-ceiling
glass interior walls with glass doors in order to share daylight and view-out with a central
common area. Functions such as storage, printing, copying, break facilities, and team-
space are situated in the central common area of the building. The design was originally
conceived as a retrofit conversion of the much-hated open landscape offices that had been
introduced from the United States, but it has been so successful that it is now used even in
new office construction. Cubicles, which in the USA are the most common retrofit solution
to the environmental problems of open landscape offices, leave much to be desired
acoustically: it has been found that adjustable background levels of ‘white noise’, when
provided as part of a ‘3I initiative’, are used by as many as 40 per cent of US office
workers in cubicles, presumably to reduce the distracting effect of nearby conversations.
The additional background noise is switched off automatically when the user is absent,
although acoustic telephone signals are allowed to continue to annoy and distract the
occupants of nearby cubicles. The obvious solution to this acoustical problem, a flashing
light signal instead of the ubiquitous warbling signal, does not seem to have occurred to
anybody.
Free-standing air cleaners are often an appropriate means of providing optional breathing
zone filtration (BZF) in cubicles and rooms. Both this function and ducted local air-supply
vents may be found as features of desk-mounted microclimate control units, sometimes
known ambiguously as environmentally responsive workstations, but here termed
individual microclimate control devices (IMCDs). Local air-supply vents effectively
move the user upstream and provide improved air quality even when there is a high degree
of recirculation. Entrainment of room air in the plume from the vent usually means that
even providing 100 per cent fresh air may not achieve very much better ventilation efficiency
in the breathing zone. Where possible, operable windows provide an important additional
degree of freedom in this respect.
The ducted local air supply vents mentioned above can also provide a high degree of
local air-temperature control. However, an equivalent effect on individual heat balance can
be achieved by non-ducted desk-mounted IMCDs even in an isothermal, well-mixed space
by means of adjustable local air velocities and thermal radiation from heated panels close to
196 Wyon
the body. Users provided with these two degrees of freedom can adjust the equivalent
temperature they experience by as much as 3 K above and below actual room air temperature.
This is shown below to be sufficient to bracket 99 per cent of individual neutral temperatures,
greatly reducing complaints of thermal discomfort. The reduction in the cost of dealing
with complaints alone can make this approach cost-effective, as each response to a ‘hot or
cold call-out’ is currently estimated to cost about $100. However, it is important to ensure
that increasing the cooling power by raising local air velocities does not inconvenience
close neighbours, irritate the eyes or blow papers off horizontal surfaces, and that heated
panels are placed where they are most effective (where their angle-factor to the body is
greatest). Desk fans and private-initiative heaters do not usually fulfil these criteria. Having
the means to adjust local equivalent temperature to current personal requirements is
probably the least common and the most appreciated degree of freedom of all. Thermal
complaints always seem to come top of everybody’s list.
The expected benefits of delegating control
When users are provided with some of the above degrees of freedom and are empowered to
use them effectively in accordance with the 3I principle, it may confidently be assumed
that health, comfort and productivity will increase. Users learn very quickly to use whatever
degrees of freedom are provided, although it must be said that the experience is often
unfamiliar, as very few of the degrees of freedom listed above are in fact provided in
conventional offices. The most important exception is openable windows – in older buildings,
in Europe – which may explain their popularity and the widespread resistance to their
elimination. As users find they have remedies for many of their complaints, they complain
less often. The reduction in the cost of handling complaints can be surprisingly large.
Delegation of control in the office of the future
The future workplace will contain many, and perhaps all, of the degrees of freedom
described above and identified as being available today. In addition, IMCDs will have
occupancy sensors and will be linked to the building control system to provide high-grade
additional control information: whether workplaces are occupied, and if so, whether the
users are within the control band delegated to them. This is a higher grade of information
than is available today from wall-mounted thermostats in zones which may or may not be
occupied. Energy conservation strategies can be implemented in unoccupied zones, and
zone set-points can be adjusted adaptively if any users are taking maximum heating or
cooling power from their units. The control delegated to the users creates a wider ‘dead-
band’, which simplifies the control problem and makes it possible to conserve energy by
allowing the building to ‘float’ more naturally with changes in thermal load and in outdoor
climatic conditions.
Building control systems will have access to many more sources of information in the
future workplace. They will be able to read thermal sensors on every desk, i.e. sensors
located in the occupied zone instead of on the corridor wall, as is currently the norm. The
use of existing telephone and computer links for this purpose will make it unnecessary to
install dedicated wiring, which will reduce installation costs considerably. Carbon dioxide
sensors in the return ducts from each zone or space will provide immediate and distributed
information on occupancy, signalling intrusion in spaces expected to be unoccupied at that
time, and accurately quantifying occupancy to ensure an adequate fresh air supply at all
times. Even smokeless, smouldering fires can be detected by carbon dioxide sensors. They
can be discriminated from human occupancy by the time course of their source strength, or
by carbon monoxide sensors, making it possible to sound the fire alarm reliably at a much
earlier stage than is detected by smoke and flame sensors.
In future workplaces, users will be able to access the building control computer at any
time by telephone or modem, to obtain online information, adjust set points, register
complaints and request maintenance. The system will be able to give them an intelligent
response, reporting current operating conditions, giving advice, explaining that there are
conflicts between users in the same area, recording complaints and confirming the dispatch
of maintenance personnel. Automatic complaint logs of this dialogue will record all system
information relevant to a complaint in ways that are prohibitively difficult and expensive
to achieve today. Automatic analysis of incoming complaints will make it possible to
optimise building operation continuously in the medium term, keeping users firmly in the
loop. Loss of perceived control and lack of confidence in building management are major
factors in the downward spiral of problem buildings. Future workplaces will quite simply
have the communication channels to the user that are needed to reverse this spiral.
Estimating how much thermal microclimate control

is required
International Standard ISO7730 includes the PMV equation, which makes it possible to
predict the air temperature for neutral heat balance of a group of subjects with known
activity level (i.e. metabolic rate) and clothing insulation (i.e. Clo-value), taking account of
mean radiant temperature, air humidity and air velocity. In practice, the uncertainties
involved in estimating the mean activity level and mean effective clothing insulation of a
real-life group, taking account of the usually completely unknown mean insulation value of
198 Wyon
the chairs on which they sit, mean that these values usually have to be ‘reverse-engineered’
from the mean temperature at which such a group is known to be thermally neutral. The
equation can be used to predict the adjustments necessary to maintain thermal neutrality
for a group if one of the six factors should change by a given amount, but it should be noted
that the approach takes no account of the spread of clothing insulation values that always
occurs within a group, of the extent to which different individuals compensate for habitual
differences in metabolic rate, skin fold thickness and preferred skin temperature by choosing
to dress differently at the office, or of individual differences in the width of the thermal
range which is regarded as acceptable. Subjects in the predicted mean vote (PMV)
experiments wore standard clothing and adjusted the air temperature until they personally
were in thermal neutrality. Subjects never wore their own clothing, and never performed
actual office work in their own idiosyncratic way. Percentage of people dissatisfied (PPD)
values should therefore not be used to determine the control range of IMCDs.
The inter-individual standard deviation (SD) of neutral temperature about the group
mean which was obtained in the PMV experiments was of the order of 0.8–1.1 K, while it
was determined to be 2.6 K by Grivel and Candas (1991) in an attempt to replicate the
PMV experiments in France: their subjects wore standard clothing but could vary their
metabolic rate at will. In an experiment by Wyon and Sandberg (1996) on discomfort due
to thermal gradients, over 200 office workers wore their own habitual office clothing while
they performed office work in a test room. They were randomly assigned to nine thermal
conditions over a range of thermal conditions equivalent to 2.8 K as measured empirically,
using a thermal manikin to estimate resulting total heat loss in each condition. Age, gender
and thermal gradient were equivalent at each level of operative temperature. If their SD had
been 2.6 K, 30 per cent would have been too hot even in the coldest condition, and 30 per
cent would have been too cold even in the warmest condition: in fact, only 7 per cent and
18 per cent respectively were dissatisfied with their total heat loss. The difference shows
that clothing is used adaptively to reduce individual differences, and is compatible with SD
= 1.17 K. This is currently the best available estimate of the range of individual preferences
under realistic office conditions. Table 12.1 uses this value to predict the range
Table 12.1 Range of individual control required for a

given percentage to be satisfied
% Comfortable Range, K Range, F
85 3.4 6.1
90 3.9 7.0
95 4.6 8.3
99 6.0 10.8
of individual control of whole-body equivalent operative temperature which would be

necessary to achieve different proportions of comfortable individuals.
It should be noted that this may vary between populations. The necessary control
range will be increased by the imposition of a dress code which makes it more difficult
to adjust clothing insulation between individuals. Table 12.1 does not predict the
necessary supply air temperature range of an IMCD, as the cooling effect is strongly
dependent on exactly how the plume strikes the body, i.e. how much of the body is
affected, which parts were affected, and the resulting air velocity and turbulence close
to the body. In practice the ability of a given design of IMCD to affect whole-body
heat balance must be determined empirically, by experiment. This has already been
done for a desk-mounted IMCD, using a thermal manikin (Wyon and Larsson, 1990).
The range of individual adjustment of whole-body equivalent operative temperature
was 3.8 K with supply air temperature equal to air temperature, and 4.9 K with
supply air temperature 8 K below ambient, sufficient according to the data underlying
Table 12.1 to ensure comfort for 89 per cent and 96 per cent of a group, respectively.
Moisture evaporation may reasonably be expected to increase the cooling effect of the
air stream sufficiently to extend the individual control range to over 6.0 K, sufficient to
ensure comfort for 99 per cent of a group. Human experiments in the field, taking
account of both evaporative cooling and user behaviour, could provide a quantitative
estimate of the range of control of an IMCD, in terms of equivalent room temperature
change, if carried out in the following way: subjects who had become familiar with the
IMCD would be asked if they were willing to turn it off for a period of about 90
minutes. Those who agreed would then be assigned at random to one of two conditions:
(1) IMCD turned off for 90 minutes; or (2) IMCD remaining in operation. The hand
skin temperature of each subject would be measured at the beginning and end of the
period. In warm conditions, it is to be expected that the mean hand skin temperature of
Group 1 would increase in relation to that of Group 2, whereas in cool conditions it
would decrease. By repeating the experiment over a range of room temperature
conditions, the room temperature bias equivalent to the cooling and heating benefit of
the IMCD, in terms of the resulting hand skin temperature actually achieved, would be
derived empirically.
The ASHRAE Handbook of Fundamentals (1997) suggests that an acceptable
percentage comfortable would be 80 per cent, but does not attempt to predict the
degree of individual control that would be necessary to ensure that any given percentage
could be comfortable, merely reproducing the PMV/PPD approach of ISO7730 for
predicting individual differences in thermal comfort sensation. The limitations of this
approach have been set out above. However, a European Union Prestandard (1994)
defines three levels of thermal environmental quality in Section A.1.3, ‘Categories of
thermal environment’. These are defined to ensure 85 per cent, 90 per cent or 95 per
200 Wyon
cent comfortable in terms of whole-body equivalent operative temperature. The EU

Prestandard does not address the provision of individual control in any quantitative
way, but states (p. 13) that ‘it is an advantage if some kind of individual control of the
thermal environment can be established for each person in a space. Individual control
of the local air temperature, mean radiant temperature or air velocity may contribute to
balance the rather large differences between individual requirements and therefore
provide fewer dissatisfied’.
The Scandinavian HVAC Association had already recommended three levels of
thermal quality (SCANVAC, 1991), corresponding to 80 per cent, 90 per cent and >90
per cent comfortable in terms of whole-body operative temperature. In contrast to the
EU Prestandard, SCANVAC suggests that a range of individual adjustment of ±2 K
would be necessary to ensure >90 per cent comfortable. SCANVAC did not have
access to the then confidential development data of Wyon and Larsson (1990) showing
that this was indeed an achievable range even without sweating or cooling of the
supply air by more than 1.5 K below ambient. Table 12.1, which is based on results
that have become available since 1991, predicts that an individual adjustment range of
±2 K about the group optimum would indeed ensure >90 per cent comfortable, but
with a small margin. The basis for a reasonably good consensus on this important
point may thus be said to exist already.
In summary, it is estimated that 99 per cent of a group would be thermally comfortable
if the equivalent room temperature provided by their microclimate could be individually
adjusted over a range of 6.0 K, 95 per cent with 4.6 K, and 90 per cent with 3.9 K.
Dress codes increase these ranges. Office cubicle walls will probably be required for
floor-, ceiling-, or wall-mounted IMCDs, to deflect air streams and thereby concentrate
their effect locally, while furniture-based IMCDs have been shown to be capable of
satisfying 99 per cent of a group even without them. A standard approach to the
assessment of individual adjustment is proposed, allowing widely different solutions,
including openable windows, to be quantitatively and empirically compared.
Acceptable levels of fan noise for individual thermal

control
An experiment by Clausen et al. (1993) at the Technical University of Denmark

quantified subjective preferences for different combinations of noise, temperature and
IAQ. Subjects made their preference judgement on the grounds of first impressions
only, and the noise was recorded road traffic noise. The results in Table 12.2 were
obtained for the percentage dissatisfied at different noise levels.
Table 12.2 Subjective percentage
dissatisfied with road noise in the DTU
experiment
dBA % Dissatisfied
35 —
40 5
45 10
50 20
55 35
60 55
Other results of the DTU experiment indicate that unless each change of 1 K in
operative temperature in the desired direction can be achieved by means of an increase
in noise level of less than 3.9 dBA, the overall degree of subjective discomfort will
actually increase. This appears to be the first direct comparison of the subjective
annoyance from noise and heat stress that has ever been made. However, the data used
to compile Tables 12.1 and 12.2 may be used to equate the increase in percentage
dissatisfied when the noise level increases with the decrease in percentage dissatisfied
when the range of individual control increases (in the hypothetical case where increased
fan noise is necessary to increase the range of individual control of operative
temperature), as shown in Table 12.3.
An assumed linear relationship between these equivalent levels of dBA and control
range (dBA = 68.6 - 6.2 × range K) accounts for 99.9 per cent of the variance, and the
coefficient of regression indicates that increasing the range of individual control by 1 K
would be ‘worth’ 6.2 dBA, if fan noise may be equated with road traffic noise. The
DTU figure of 3.9 dBA per K is rather lower and as it was based on a direct comparison,
must be regarded as more reliable until field studies prove otherwise. A behavioural
study of the trade-off between thermal discomfort and noise could be carried out as
follows: the set point of a room thermostat would be linked to the volume control of
recorded fan noise in such a way that noise will increase linearly from zero at 27°C to
a maximum at 21°C; for different fixed values of the maximum noise level ranging from
70 dBA down to 35 dBA, subjects would be allowed to select their preferred set-point
on the basis of several days’ work in the room; this study would verify or disprove the
trade-off predicted in Table 12.3 and would provide a better basis for the design of
future IMCDs. A pilot experiment recently performed under tropical conditions in the
Philippines (Santos and Gunnarsen, 1997) indicates that subjects are indeed capable
of systematically trading-off temperature against noise, although the trade-off function
obtained in this experiment would not apply to unacclimatised subjects elsewhere.
202 Wyon
Table 12.3 Levels of noise and thermal control range for a
given percentage dissatisfied
% Dissatisfied dBA Range, K
5 40 4.58
10 45 3.84
20 50 3.00
35 55 2.18
Estimating the productivity impact of providing

individual control
Published research on group performance decrement in response to thermal changes

is assumed to be valid for individuals, if individual neutral temperature is
substituted for group average neutral temperature. The findings of a review of
thermal effects on performance (Wyon, 1993) may be simplified for the present
purpose as follows:
1. Thinking: the performance of mental tasks requiring concentration was

typically reduced by 30 per cent at 27°C (6 K above group average neutral
temperature 21°C), in comparison with 20°C. Individual performance is
therefore assumed to be 100 per cent at temperatures up to individual
neutrality, to decrease linearly to 70 per cent over the next 6 K, and to
remain at 70 per cent at higher temperatures.
2. Typing: individual performance of routine, well-practised office work such
as typing is assumed to be 100 per cent at temperatures up to individual
neutrality, to decrease linearly to 70 per cent over the next 4 K, and to
remain at 70 per cent at higher temperatures.
3. Skill: individual performance of skilled manual work is assumed to be 100
per cent at temperatures down to 6 K above individual neutrality, and to
decrease linearly with temperature to 80 per cent at temperatures 12 K or
more below individual neutrality.
4. Speed: the speed of individual finger movements is assumed to be 100 per
cent at temperatures down to 6 K above individual neutrality, and to decrease
linearly with temperature to 50 per cent at temperatures 12 K or more below
individual neutrality.
As in Table 12.1, individual neutral temperatures are assumed to be distributed

normally about the group mean with SD = 1.17 K. Providing individual control
makes it possible for each individual to approach thermal neutrality to the extent
to which control has been delegated. It is assumed that an individual would refrain
from using this possibility if performance would thereby be reduced, and would
not go beyond neutrality even if performance would thereby be increased. The
impact of individual control on group average performance is small for subjects
whose individual neutral temperature is close to the group average, and large for
subjects who would prefer temperatures very different from the group average.
Table 12.4 shows group average performance at room temperatures ranging from
3 K below group average neutral temperature to 6 K above, with no individual
control (IC = 0 K), using the above assumptions. Column 6 is the unweighted
mean of all four task types, i.e. assuming an equal amount of time is regularly
spent on each type of task. The effect on group average performance of providing
±3 K of individual control (IC = ±3 K) is shown in Table 12.5 for the same range
of room temperatures.
T h e v a l u e s i n p a r e n t h e s e s i n Ta b l e 1 2 . 4 a r e t h e v a l u e s o b s e r v e d i n t h e
Table 12.4 Group average performance for four task types, with IC = 0 K (no individual
control), at room temperatures ranging from 3 K below to 6 K above group average
neutral temperature. The values in parentheses are the actual experimental results on
which the interpolations are based
K Thinking Typing Skill Speed Mean
-3 100.8 102.1 90.3 75.7 92.2

-2 100.6 101.7 91.4 78.6 93.1
-1 (100.0) (100.0) 92.6 81.4 93.5
0 98.1 95.1 93.7 84.3 92.8
+1 94.6 86.5 94.9 87.1 90.8
+2 89.9 76.8 96.0 90.0 88.2
+3 84.7 (70.0) 97.1 92.9 86.2
+4 79.4 67.2 98.3 95.6 85.1
+5 74.3 66.6 99.3 98.1 84.6
+6 (70.0) 66.5 (100.0) (100.0) 84.1
Table 12.5 Performance improvement with IC = ±3 K as a percentage of Table 12.4

reference values, at room temperatures ranging from 3 K below to 6 K above group
average neutral temperature
K Thinking Typing Skill Speed Mean
-3 0.0 0.0 3.4 8.6 3.0

-2 0.2 0.4 3.5 8.6 3.1
-1 0.8 2.1 3.4 8.6 4.0
0 2.7 7.0 3.4 8.6 5.4
+1 6.0 15.2 3.4 8.5 8.3
+2 10.1 23.2 3.3 8.1 11.2
+3 13.4 25.1 2.9 7.1 12.1
+4 15.2 19.3 2.1 5.4 10.5
+5 15.6 10.2 1.2 3.3 7.6
+6 14.7 3.5 0.6 1.4 5.1
204 Wyon
experiments. The cold conditions in the skill and speed experiments are off scale, 12 and 18
K below the upper reference temperature shown. The calculated values are expressed as a
percentage of performance in the reference condition in each experiment. The values represent
the performance levels that may be expected at different room temperatures in conventional
buildings with no individual control.
The values in Table 12.5 may be directly added to the corresponding values in Table 12.4
to obtain the performance levels that may be expected when individual control corresponding
to room temperature changes of ±3 K is provided. As in Table 12.4, ‘mean’ performance in
column 6 is the unweighted mean of the values in columns 2–5. It should be noted that this
is an appropriate estimate of the overall impact on productivity only if an equal amount of
time is spent on all four types of task, which will not often be the case.
A field experiment on individual control: the West

Bend Mutual study
The rate at which insurance claims were processed at the West Bend Mutual insurance
company was shown to increase by 2.8 per cent when individual control was operative, in
comparison with when it was installed but inoperative (Kroner et al., 1992). This productivity
metric is mainly determined by decision-making, i.e. thinking, and is close to the above
prediction of 2.7 per cent for IC = ±3 K. In the report of this field experiment the West Bend
management state that ‘general productivity benefited by between 4 and 6 per cent’, which
is between the values predicted for thinking and for typing, and very close to the productivity
improvement predicted when an equal amount of time is spent on all four types of task (5.4
per cent improvement). The figure of 8.1 per cent dissatisfied with the thermal environment
(voting 1 or 2 on a scale from 1 to 5) was down from 50 per cent dissatisfied in the old
building and would be expected if individual control of ±2.2 K were available, if room
temperature were set to the group average neutral temperature, and if the standard deviation
of individual neutral temperature were as has been assumed above (SD = 1.17 K). Field
experience thus supports the present theoretical predictions.
Summary
It has been shown that individual control equivalent to ±2 K can be achieved and would
satisfy >90 per cent, while individual control equivalent to ±3 K would be necessary to
satisfy 99 per cent. A new method has been described for calculating the expected effect on
group average productivity of providing individual control. The provision of individual
control equivalent to being able to change room temperature in the range ±3 K about the
actual value, if used by each individual to approach conditions providing individual thermal
neutrality whenever this can be done without decreasing performance on the task in hand,
would increase group average performance by up to 7.0 per cent, depending on the nature of
the task, even when room temperature was equal to group average neutral temperature.
Averaging with equal weighting across the four very different tasks considered, all relevant to
office work or light industrial work, the improvement in productivity achieved at the group
average neutral temperature is 5.4 per cent if occupants use this strategy. The performance
improvement due to individual control increases at room temperatures above group average
neutral temperature. The outcome in terms of bottom-line productivity depends on the
proportion of each person’s time for which each task is critical – which becomes increasingly
difficult to estimate at higher levels in the job hierarchy – but it should be remembered that
this advantage occurs in addition to the comfort and motivational advantages of enabling 99
per cent of a group to achieve thermal comfort when room temperature is set to the group
average neutral temperature. The calculated impact on productivity is a conservative estimate,
as comfort in itself has not been assumed to improve performance, although it may well do
so. If an IMCD uses a fan to provide additional cooling effect under individual control, the
noise increase should be less than 3.9 dBA per K equivalent, or no overall subjective benefit
will be experienced. As it is not particularly difficult to reduce the noise level of the small
fans required for individual microclimate control, productivity improvements have been
calculated assuming that there will be no negative effects of fan noise on performance.
References
ASHRAE (1993) Handbook of Fundamentals. Atlanta, GA: ASHRAE.

Clausen, G., Carrick, L., Fanger, P.O., Sun Woo Kim, Poulsen, T. and Rindel, J.H. (1993) A
comparative study of discomfort caused by indoor air pollution, thermal load and noise.
Indoor Air, 3, 255–262.
European Union Prestandard (1994) Ventilation for Buildings – Design Criteria for the Indoor
Environment. CEN Ref. prENV 1752:1994 E Final Draft.
Grivel, F. and Candas, V. (1991) Ambient temperatures preferred by young European males and
females at rest. Ergonomics, 34(3), 365–378.
Kroner, W., Stark-Martin, J.A. and Willemain, T. (1992) Rensselaer’s West Bend Mutual Study:
using advanced office technology to increase productivity. Center for Architectural Research,
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Santos, A.M.B. and Gunnarsen, L. (1997) Trade-off between temperature and noise, air velocity
and window area during chamber tests. Proceedings of Healthy Buildings/IAQ ’97, 2, 41–46.
SCANVAC (1991) Classified Indoor Climate Systems. Stockholm: Swedish Indoor Climate
Institute.
Wyon, D.P. (1993) Healthy buildings and their impact on productivity. Proceedings of the 6th
International Conference on Indoor Air Quality and Climate – Indoor Air ’93, 6, 3–13.
206 Wyon
Wyon, D.P. (1998) Individual control at each workplace for health, comfort and productivity.
INvironment, 4(1), 1–6.
Wyon, D.P. and Larsson, S. (1990) Individual Control of the Microclimate for Sedentary Work
(in Swedish). Laboratory report, Autocontrol AB, Gothenburg, Sweden. (Thermal manikin
test results from an early prototype of the desk-mounted Climadesk IMCD are available as
‘EHT Profile Diagrams’).
Wyon, D.P. and Sandberg, M. (1996) Discomfort due to vertical thermal gradients. Indoor Air,
6(1), 48–54.
Prior publication
This chapter is based on a paper to Indoor Air ’96 at Nagoya, Japan, 21–26 July 1996, and
on the content of a lecture at the Workplace Comfort Forum ‘Creating the productive
workplace’ in London, 30 October 1997 (Wyon, 1998).
Chapter 13
Creating high-quality
workplaces using lighting
Jennifer A. Veitch
Introduction
Many people have read about the Hawthorne experiments on illumination (Roethlisberger
and Dickson, 1939; Snow, 1927). The investigators set out to understand the effects of
lighting on the performance of workers assembling electrical products. They pre-selected
a set of employees to participate in the tests and moved their work area to a specially
prepared space, where they worked under a variety of lighting conditions. The results
surprised everyone: regardless of the direction of the lighting change (even when lighting
levels dropped), the work output of the employees increased. Even when the investigators
gave the appearance of having changed the lighting, but had in fact simply taken out and
replaced the same lamps, performance increased.
The results led to an important series of studies concerning the relationships between
employers and employees (Roethlisberger and Dickson, 1939). On closer analysis the
investigators realised that the special experimental set-up, separate from other employees,
and the knowledge that they were participating in work that might benefit their working
conditions, were powerful motivators to the participants in the lighting experiments. The
investigators, and many others, concluded that the physical environment at work was
relatively unimportant to workers’ performance. Management–employee relations seemed
to be the important consideration.
This conclusion rests on an oversimplification: the assumption that there is a direct
cause-and-effect relationship between physical conditions and human behaviour. Because
they did not find that lighting levels improved performance, the researchers assumed that
light levels were irrelevant to performance. Instead, psychologists now know, the effects
of physical conditions on human behaviour are mediated by complex cognitive processes.
In the Hawthorne experiments, one likely explanation for the results is that people
interpreted their special workroom and the changing experimental conditions as indications
208 Veitch
of managers’ concern for their welfare. The employees’ interpretation probably led to the
improved work output. It was not the case that the physical environment was irrelevant to
their performance, rather that its effect was mediated by the participants’ expectations and
beliefs.
One consequence of the Hawthorne experiments was a drought in psychologists’ interest
in lighting and other physical conditions (Gifford, 1997); today, we are only beginning to
understand how the lit environment influences mental states and processes that, in turn,
determine work performance, satisfaction, and other important outcomes. The motivation
for much of this research, for lighting and for other indoor conditions, is economic: buildings
cost less than employees, so any environmental condition that decreases individual
performance (either in quantity or quality), increases absenteeism, or contributes to turnover,
is more expensive to organisations than the capital and operating costs of better indoor
environments (Woods, 1989). Productivity, the organisational outcome most sought after,
is a complex concept defined in different ways in various disciplines, but is not synonymous
with individual performance (Pritchard, 1992). One commonality in definitions of
productivity is the concept of efficiency. Productivity is an index of output relative to
inputs. Using the efficiency definition, a poor indoor environment decreases organisational
productivity both by reducing revenue and by increasing costs.
The research literature concerning micro-level environmental conditions and productivity
does not lend itself to direct calculations of the consequences for organisations (Rubin,
1987). Simple, direct promises of the form ‘This lighting design will improve productivity
by 15 per cent’ are not possible, however desirable they might be to marketing agents.
However, by understanding the psychological and organisational processes that influence
employees in their working environments, we can develop advanced design recommendations
that support employee workspace needs. This is the approach taken here.
Veitch and Newsham (1998a) have presented a model for lighting–behaviour research
that includes six categories of human needs addressed by lighting. These are visibility, task
performance, social behaviour and communication, mood and comfort, aesthetic judgements,
and health and safety. The literature documents several psychological processes thought
to mediate the relationship between lighting conditions and these behaviours, of which
three are discussed here: visibility, arousal and stress, and positive affect. They are presented
in order of increasing psychological complexity, following the path from the luminous
stimulus through visual processing, physiological responses, and interpretative, cognitive
processes. In the concluding section, we turn to the integration of this information with
other considerations such as energy efficiency, architecture, and costs, to produce a model
for achieving good-quality lighting in workplaces. Good-quality lighting, supportive of
human needs, contributes to conditions that sustain organisational productivity.
Use of lighting 209
From light to vision
Light is visible electromagnetic radiation between 380 and 780 nm in wavelength

(Commission Internationale de l’Éclairage, 1987). We see light directly from its sources –
the sun, fire, electric lamps – and we see objects when light is reflected from them. Light
enters the eye through the pupil, is focused by the lens, and is detected by photoreceptive
cells on the retina (for more detail about the visual system, see Dowling (1987), or Spillman
and Werner (1990)). The focal point for a correctly focused eye is a point on the retina
called the fovea, where specialised cells (cones) detect colour in red, green, or blue bands.
These cells respond selectively to the wavelength composition of the light, and higher
centres in the brain interpret the signals to perceive colour. Elsewhere on the retina, other
photoreceptors (rods) detect light and dark. Neural impulses from the retinal receptors
pass through the optic chiasm to the lateral geniculate nuclei (LGN), and terminate in the
primary visual cortex.
Lighting researchers have focused much of their attention on visibility, with the result
that we have an excellent understanding of what is needed to make objects visible. Four
variables have the greatest effects: the age of the viewer, task size, task/background contrast,
and task luminance.1 Objects are more easily viewed when they are larger, have higher
contrast, and at higher luminance. Rea and Ouellette (1991) produced a model of relative
visual performance (RVP) that allows precise predictions of visual performance given
these input conditions. The model includes the effects of the decreasing visual acuity that
occurs with age.
The model shows asymptotic relationships. For any given task luminance and task
size, there is a range of task contrasts for which RVP is high and nearly constant; however,
below a certain value (which depends on the luminance and size), RVP drops drastically.
Rea and Ouellette (1991) have called this a ‘plateau and escarpment’ model, for this reason.
Likewise, for a given task contrast and size there is a range of task luminances that
produces consistently high RVP. The asymptotic relationship between visual performance
and luminance means that, as Boyce (1996) said, ‘To put it bluntly . . . for many visual
tasks, lighting is unimportant to visual performance’ (p. 44). There is a broad range of
acceptable light levels that provide adequate quantity of illumination to see in most
workplaces.
Certain industrial tasks, however, will require special attention to the task characteristics.
Some details are so small or have such low contrast that increasing the task luminance will
not sufficiently increase task visibility (for example, sewing with black thread on black
cloth). In these cases, magnifiers and directional lighting (to increase contrast by using
relief) will be necessary parts of lighting design. For more details, see common recommended
practice documents such as the CIBSE Code for Interior Lighting (Chartered Institution of
Building Services Engineers, 1994) or the IESNA Lighting Handbook (Rea, 1993).
210 Veitch
In any workplace, lighting conditions that reduce task contrast will adversely affect
visibility. Reflected images of luminaires in VDT screens and veiling reflections (regular
luminaire reflections superimposed on diffuse lighting) are examples of glare that reduces
task contrast. Changes in the lighting can prevent such problems, as can changing certain
task characteristics. Parabolic-louvred luminaires, designed to reduce glare from reflected
images in VDTs, lead to better performance on computer-based tasks and lower ratings of
glare (Veitch and Newsham, 1998b). Computer-based task performance is also better when
the display uses a light background and dark characters (Sanders and Bernecker, 1990;
Veitch and Newsham, 1998b).
The two retinal receptor types have different spectral sensitivities and functions. Rod
vision dominates at low light levels (below 0.034 cd/m2); this sensitivity function is called
the scotopic sensitivity curve, and peaks at 505 nm (blue-green). Cone vision dominates
at light levels typical of interiors, and is described by the phototopic sensitivity curve,
which peaks at 550 nm (yellow-green). It is because scotopic vision is principally based on
rod receptors that our colour vision is so poor at night. Some researchers believe that both
scotopic and photopic vision influence visual performance even at high light levels. They
argue that scotopic processes control pupil size such that a higher concentration of short-
wavelength light (around 505 nm) reduces pupil size sufficiently to increase the resolution
of small details (Berman et al., 1993, 1994), much like a smaller aperture on a camera.
However, this notion is controversial and other researchers have not repeated these results
(Halonen, 1993; Rowlands et al., 1971).
Fluorescent lighting is a complex system that includes the lamps, the luminaires that
hold them, an optical system (usually either a lens or a louvre), and a ballast to create the
needed circuit conditions (voltage, current, and waveform) for starting and operating the
lamp. Conventional ballasts used a magnetic core–coil system that resulted in oscillations
at twice the rate of the AC electrical supply (thus, luminous modulation of 100 Hz in the
UK and Europe, 120 Hz in North America). Most people cannot perceive this modulation
as flicker, but there is evidence of neural activity in response to modulation at rates as high
as 147 Hz (Berman et al., 1991). This response occurs not only at the retinal level, but in
the LGN and the visual cortex as well (Eysel and Burandt, 1984; Schneider, 1968). Mounting
evidence suggests that low-frequency flicker interferes with visual processing, disrupting
the eye movements in reading, causing visual fatigue, and hampering visual performance
and computer-based task performance (Veitch and McColl, 1995; Veitch and Newsham,
1998b; Wilkins, 1986). Energy-efficient, high-frequency electronic ballasts, which use
integrated electronic circuitry to operate lamps at rates between 20,000 and 60,000 Hz,
alleviate this problem because the modulation rate exceeds the capacity of human physiology.
Functionally, they produce a constant luminous output.
Use of lighting 211
The sensory system, from retina to visual cortex, is but the first step in a sequence of
complex processes leading to the perception of objects, colour, depth, movement, and
other features. Without these interpretative mechanisms, the images delivered by the
sensory system would be so much noise, like a grainy, blurred photograph. Lighting has
few direct effects on perceptual processes, but lighting influences on the visual image can
interact to produce visual illusions. For example, depth perception on stairs requires a
contrast contour of either colour or shadow. Some visual illusions caused by lighting can be
dangerous if they obscure important details such as the depth of a stair or the movement of
machinery (stroboscopic effect). Detailed consideration of these processes is beyond the
scope of this chapter; however, excellent general works are available (e.g. Gregory, 1978).
Activation, arousal, and stress
Arousal is a general state of mental and physical activation (Landy, 1985). Arousal theory
holds that there is an inverted-U function between arousal levels and behaviours, with an
optimal arousal level for each behaviour. For task performance, the curve is believed to
shift up for simple tasks (that is, the optimal arousal level is higher if the task is easier).
Stress is the name for a set of physiological and hormonal changes that arise in response
to threatening or unpleasant events, called stressors. Stressors can include environmental
conditions such as direct glare, or loud noise; life events, such as bereavement; or emotional
states, such as conflict. Chronic exposure to stressors can lead to unpleasant health effects,
such as high blood pressure. Stress is linked to arousal because the response to such events
can include a heightened state of neurological activation. Thus, in lighting, the goal is to
create luminous conditions that would lead to optimal arousal, while avoiding conditions
that might act as stressors.
Light exposure is well known to suppress melatonin secretion and to control circadian
rhythms (Hill, 1992).2 Melatonin induces sleep; its suppression leads to wakefulness.
Growing insight into these mechanisms has led to the development of schedules and
technologies to increase the light exposure of night-shift workers, successfully improving
their adaptation (Boyce et al., 1997; Czeisler et al., 1990). Both timing and intensity
of illumination (illuminance3) influence the outcome. Some photobiologists believe
that most people suffer from a deficit of light exposure, even day-shift workers (Brainard
and Bernecker, 1996), but there is no consensus on what the necessary daily light dose
might be, nor on the need for electric lighting to provide it. Moreover, to increase
lighting levels substantially, as would be required for biological effectiveness, would
risk serious energy consumption and glare-control problems.
212 Veitch
Arousal explanations for lighting effects are difficult to test because of a logical
flaw in arousal theory. To test the theory, one needs to determine the relationship
between the independent variable (lighting levels, for example) and arousal levels and,
in addition, the relationship between arousal and the performance of various tasks.
One needs to know the optimal arousal level for optimal task performance and one
needs to know which lighting conditions will cause that arousal level. Usually, however,
the optimal arousal level is inferred after the fact based on the physical conditions that
led to the best performance. For example, if I conducted a study of lighting level
effects that found that performance was best under 800 lx and worse under both 400
and 1200 lx, then I might conclude that 800 lx creates the optimal arousal level and that
the study supports arousal theory. However, the study does not test the theory at all,
because one could equally well argue, if performance under 400 lx was best, that both
800 and 1200 lx produced too high an arousal level and that the experimental conditions
captured only part of the inverted-U curve.
We do not know the optimal arousal level for most tasks, nor is there a clear
relationship between illuminance and general arousal levels (Veitch and Newsham,
1996). None the less, the belief that increasing illuminance will increase arousal and
improve task performance is long-standing, and underlies many of the changes in
lighting practice over this century (Pansky, 1985). Many experiments in the laboratory
and the field have attempted to address this belief, with very mixed results. Gifford et
al. (1997) conducted a meta-analysis (a quantitative review that combines the results
of many studies into one general conclusion) of the literature concerning illuminance
and office task performance. Many studies could not be included in the review because
their published reports included too few details. Of the studies that could be included,
contrasts between low (average 70 lx) and medium (average 486 lx) illuminance levels
did not produce significant effects on task performance; however, contrasts between
low and high illuminance (average 1962 lx) produced a (statistically significant) average
correlation of 0.25 between illuminance and task performance, which is a small- to
medium-sized relationship.
Arousal is one possible explanation for this relationship, but other explanations are
equally plausible. For example, the higher illuminance levels might have improved
visibility; 70 lx is quite dark for paper-based work. Novelty is another possible
explanation. On closer analysis, Gifford et al. (1997) found that studies that provided
more than a 15-minute adaptation period showed a smaller effect. This suggests that a
high illuminance can improve office task performance as compared to a very low one,
but the effect might not last. Most people, of course, spend considerably longer than
15 minutes in their offices. Once they adapt to conditions, illuminance probably does
not influence performance, provided the level is adequate for seeing task details. More
light is not necessarily better light.
Use of lighting 213
Another notion about the arousal effects of illuminance is that higher light levels
lead to louder conversation and more communication. Sanders et al. (1974) observed
louder communication in naturally-occurring groups in a university corridor near areas
where the lamps were on than in delamped areas (over the range 10–270 lx). They
concluded that higher arousal associated with the brighter areas caused the effect, but
because the areas were continuous along one corridor it is impossible to determine to
which lighting conditions the speakers had adapted when the measurements were
taken. In contrast, Veitch and Kaye (1988) reported that groups of female university
students conversing about fictional job candidates were louder under low illuminance
(400 lx) than high illuminance (1274 lx). The authors speculated that the unusual
nature of the dim lighting condition caused the louder speech; conversely, students in
a brightly lit classroom are usually not expected to speak loudly. In fact, one could
argue that the unusual lighting was more arousing than the bright lighting; but this
leaves one with a circular argument in which any outcome can be explained using
arousal theory. Good tests of arousal theory require unambiguous predictions about
the expected effects on physiological systems (Blascovich and Kelsey, 1990; Venables,
1984), but most lighting researchers lack the expertise to make such predictions and
their required measurements.
Whether or not lighting conditions influence arousal, it is clear that they can act as
stressors. A bright light shone directly on the face during interrogation is a classic
example of a deliberately created stressful, threatening situation. Glare, either directly
from light sources in the field of view or by reflection in glossy surfaces, is the less
extreme instance of light as a stressor. Discomfort glare is a well-known phenomenon
that has a physiological basis (Berman et al., 1994). Very high luminances in the field
of view, or very highly non-uniform luminance distributions, can cause discomfort;
lay-people believe that glare can cause headaches (Veitch and Gifford, 1996a). Veiling
luminances can also be unacceptable even if the degree of contrast reduction does not
reduce visual performance (Bjørset and Frederiksen 1979).
Low-frequency flicker might also constitute a stressful lighting condition. In a field
experiment in which participants were unaware of the changes in lighting conditions,
reports of headaches and eyestrain dropped dramatically when fluorescent lights were
run on high-frequency electronic ballasts instead of low-frequency magnetic ballasts
(Wilkins et al., 1989). Lindner and Kropf (1993) also found that increasing the operating
rate of fluorescent lighting decreased the complaint rate for eyestrain, headache, and
other symptoms.
Beliefs, expectations, and emotions
Physiological responses and the behaviours they trigger are modified by other, higher
cognitive processes and existing states. What we already know and believe influences
214 Veitch
the information we attend to and can bias our thinking and perception. We pay more
attention to information that is vivid and personal, and, we remember more accurately
the information that is consistent with our beliefs (Norman, 1976). In judging
probabilities of success or failure, we assign greater weight to information that is more
easily recalled (Tversky and Kahneman, 1974). If we have selectively attended to cues
or stimuli around us, or if our beliefs are based on inaccurate information or
misunderstanding, then we can be led by these biases to make incorrect decisions.
Knowledge about laypeople’s beliefs and expectations concerning lighting has
implications for workplace lighting design. For example, people distrust fluorescent
lighting on principle, believing that it can cause adverse health effects ranging from
headache to melanoma (Stone, 1992; Veitch and Gifford, 1996a; Veitch et al., 1993).
Except for headache and eyestrain associated with flicker, discussed above, these fears
are groundless (Stone, 1992). However, these fears influence lighting choices: people
who feared the ill-effects of fluorescent lighting were less likely to purchase compact
fluorescent lamps for their homes (Beckstead and Boyce, 1992). Successful attempts
to implement novel lighting technologies and designs will require an understanding of
existing beliefs about lighting in order to direct information and education towards
removing such biases.
Another reason for understanding existing beliefs and preferences about lighting is
to create luminous conditions that match what the occupants want and expect.
Obtaining these lighting conditions is believed to lead to a pleasant emotional state
that psychologists call positive affect. Positive affect theory (Baron, 1994) states
that environmental conditions that create positive affect lead to better performance,
greater effort, less conflict, and greater willingness to help others. Experiments in
which positive affect was induced using fragrance have supported this theory (Baron,
1990; Baron and Thomley, 1994). Application of positive affect theory to lighting
requires, first, that we know which luminous conditions people prefer. Conclusive
proof of the theory would accrue with evidence that performance and other outcomes
were consistently better under the preferred conditions than under non-preferred
conditions. The scientific lighting literature currently shows limited support (Baron et
al., 1992; Knez, 1995), but in these studies positive affect was not consistently
related to the experimental lighting conditions.
One reason for this could be the wide individual differences in preferred lighting
conditions. Although many studies have found that people prefer illuminance levels
that are higher than current recommended practice (e.g. Boyce, 1979; Halonen and
Lehtovaara, 1995; Begemann et al., 1994), the variability from one person to another
is also striking. Halonen and Lehtovaara (1995) concluded that it was so great that it
would be impossible to design an automated daylight-linked control system that would
Use of lighting 215
suit the majority of individuals. Several investigators have attempted to identify
preferred luminance levels for walls and luminance ratios in workplaces, but a
comparison of them shows marked differences in the preferred levels (Loe et al., 1994;
Tregenza et al., 1974; Ooyen et al., 1987; Miller et al., 1995). The tendency for
lighting researchers to base their conclusions on small samples, short exposures, and
poorly controlled research designs can explain these inconsistent results. Cultural
variations both between nations and across time might also explain the discrepancies
in the literature; the foregoing studies include samples from the UK, Sweden, The
Netherlands, and the USA.
Individual, manual controls or lighting design choices are two strategies that might
address the problem of individual differences in lighting preferences. When one does
not know which conditions will create positive affect, these would allow people to
self-select. Many lighting designers and researchers alike believe that people with
personal controls will be more satisfied and will work more productively (e.g. Barnes,
1981; Simpson, 1990). Not only will desired luminous conditions result, the reasoning
goes, but the state of perceived control is itself desirable.
The psychological literature generally supports that hypothesis, but with some
exceptions (Burger, 1989). Perceived control does not lead to desirable outcomes when
the individual fears that making the wrong choice will cause a loss of face, when it
appears that an expert is more likely to make a better choice, or when one thinks that
choosing will lead to failure. In one experiment, making a lighting choice in front of the
experimenter and another participant led to poorer and slower performance on a
creativity task than occurred for people who had no lighting choice (Veitch and Gifford,
1996b). Furthermore, Wineman (1982) suggested that in a demanding, stressful
workplace, providing additional choices about physical conditions could add to the
job load in undesirable ways. Individualised controls that people do not understand
how to use, that do not work as intended, or that demand responses from overworked
employees are unlikely to achieve satisfactory results. Likewise, providing lighting
choices without providing background information about what luminous conditions
they will create or how they work is unlikely to create perceived control, especially if
the choices are inconsistent with employees’ existing beliefs and expectations.
Although the precise levels for luminance, luminance ratios, and illuminance remain
in debate, there also exist certain consistent, general preferences. People prefer brighter
vertical surfaces to dark ones (e.g. Ooyen et al., 1987; Sanders and Collins, 1996).
They also prefer daylight when it is available, and many believe that it is superior to
electric light (Heerwagen and Heerwagen, 1986; Veitch et al., 1993; Veitch and Gifford,
1996a). Preferences are also greater for luminous conditions described as ‘interesting’,
which are usually non-uniform but use luminance to reinforce the design features
(Hawkes et al., 1979; Loe et al., 1982, 1994).
216 Veitch
Few studies have set out explicitly to test the positive affect theory, and none has
clearly demonstrated that luminous conditions create positive affect. Baron et al.
(1992) found that although there were no effects of illuminance or lamp type on direct
measures of positive affect, the pattern of results was consistent with the effects of
other conditions known to create positive affect. For instance, participants rated the
appearance of a room lit with warm-white lamps at 150 lx as more pleasant than the
other conditions, and also performed better on a word categorisation task in that room.
Preferred conditions also were associated with a preference for resolving disagreements
with cooperative strategies rather than conflict. These effects are similar to behaviour
in people whose positive affect was induced by the receipt of a small gift. Knez (1995)
attempted to replicate the work of Baron et al., with mixed success. He observed
inconsistent effects of lighting conditions on measures of positive and negative affect,
but the conditions that caused better affect (more positive or less negative affect) were
associated with better performance outcomes.
Comparisons between lighting systems provide no clearer results. A field comparison
of office areas retrofitted with either parabolic-louvred luminaires or suspended lensed
direct/indirect luminaires found that the employees preferred the lensed direct/indirect
luminaires and rated their work performance as better than the employees whose area
received the parabolic louvred luminaires (Hedge et al., 1995). Katzev (1992) compared
performance and satisfaction in four identical enclosed offices lit with different lighting
systems. A recessed direct/indirect system was one of the more preferred systems
(preference rankings depended on the way preference was assessed), and in that room
reading comprehension was highest. However, typing performance was lowest in that
room. It is possible that positive affect influences certain work behaviours more than
others, or alternatively that lighting preferences differ for various tasks, but these
questions remain for future research to answer.
The future of lighting research lies in deepening our understanding of the role of
cognitive processes in lighting–behaviour relationships. The interplay of beliefs,
expectations, affect and perceived control is complex, making research in this area
appear unnecessarily abstract for practical application. Only when we have any
understanding of how luminous conditions influence work performance, communication,
perceptions, and social behaviours will we begin to be able to make precise predictions
about the likely effects of a particular design on occupants in the same way that visual
performance can be precisely predicted. This understanding can only come from
thorough investigations into these fundamental processes.
Conclusions
‘Hide the source, light the walls; don’t cause glare problems’ is how one well-known
designer summarised his views on lighting quality for offices at a seminar on office lighting
Use of lighting 217
(M. Kohn, personal communication). This chapter has expanded on that good advice using
examples drawn from the scientific lighting literature. A set of general guidelines for workplace
lighting that meets occupant needs is provided in Table 13.1 (refer to Chartered Institution
of Building Services Engineers (1994) or Rea (1993) for more detailed guidance).
The complexity of the lighting–productivity equation increases when one considers
that lighting installations must meet both immediate and long-term needs of several groups.
There are the needs of occupants, which this chapter has emphasised; the economic needs
of clients; the needs to integrate lighting in a pleasing way with architecture and to respect
building codes and standards; and, not least, the long-term need to protect the environment.
Lighting quality requires energy efficiency (Figure 13.1). Although energy-efficient lighting
installations carry a premium in initial costs, interactions with other building systems
(particularly cooling systems) can reduce the payback period for energy-efficiency
investments by lowering annual energy costs (Newsham and Veitch, 1997).
Although the literature is not conclusive on such topics as preferred luminance ratios or
desired wall luminance, it does support the argument that investments in lighting pay off
in the long run. Lighting contributes to environmental satisfaction and to individual
Table 13.1 Lighting guidelines for productive workplaces
Mediating process Guidelines

Visibility • appropriate horizontal and vertical illuminances
for tasks and viewers
• control unwanted light (glare), both direct and
reflected
• use high-frequency ballasts for fluorescent lights
Arousal, activation and stress • investigate light exposure for aiding night-shift
workers
• avoid creating stressors: direct glare, excessive
luminance contrast
• use high-frequency ballasts for fluorescent lights
Beliefs, expectations, affect • learn end-users’ expectations and beliefs about

lighting
• educate users before implementing new
technologies or designs
• create interest by integrating luminance variability
with architecture
• keep vertical surfaces bright
• use daylighting and windows where possible
• consider individual controls, but educate users
and maintain systems
218 Veitch
Figure 13.1 Lighting quality: the integration of individual well-being, architecture and
economics
performance at levels sufficient to support capital and operating expenses for lighting (e.g.
Veitch and Newsham, 1998b; Wilkins et al., 1989). Lighting is a popular target for such
investment because it is a small portion of the building investment, which itself is a minor
expense in comparison to employee compensation (Woods, 1989). Fisk and Rosenfeld
(1997), in calculating the potential economic consequences of investments in indoor
environment improvements, estimated that the performance effects now reported could
translate into productivity increases between 0.5 per cent and 5 per cent, which is within the
range of acceptable return on investment.
Clearly, the goal of creating high-quality lighting to improve organisational productivity
is more challenging than the Hawthorne researchers realised when they changed workplace
lighting by increasing the wattage of incandescent lamps. Good-quality lighting demands
simultaneous resolution of requirements that sometimes conflict, and coordination with
other building systems. Difficult or not, the effort is worth while, for in achieving this goal,
everyone benefits.
Use of lighting 219
References
Barnes, R.D. (1981) Perceived freedom and control in the built environment. In J.H. Harvey
(ed.), Cognition, Social Behavior, and the Environment, 409–422. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Baron, R.A. (1990) Environmentally induced positive affect: its impact on self-efficacy, task
performance, negotiation, and conflict. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol., 20, 368–384.
Baron, R.A. (1994) The physical environment of work settings: effects on task performance,
interpersonal relations, and job satisfaction. In B.M. Staw and L.L. Cummings (eds), Research
in Organizational Behavior, vol. 16, 1–46. Greenwich, CN: JAI Press.
Baron, R.A., Rea, M.S. and Daniels, S.G. (1992) Effects of indoor lighting (illuminance and
spectral distribution) on the performance of cognitive tasks and interpersonal behaviors: the
potential mediating role of positive affect. Motivation and Emotion, 16, 1–33.
Baron, R.A. and Thomley, J. (1994) A whiff of reality: positive affect as a potential mediator of
the effects of pleasant fragrances on task performance and helping. Environ. and Behav., 26,
766–784.
Beckstead, J.W. and Boyce, P.R. (1992) Structural equation modeling in lighting research: an
application to residential acceptance of new fluorescent lighting. Lighting Res. and Technol.,
24, 189–201.
Begemann, S.H.A., Aarts, M.P.J. and Tenner, A.D. (1994) Daylight, artificial light, and people.
Annual Conference of the Illuminating Engineering Society of Australia and New Zealand,
Melbourne, November.
Berman, S.M., Bullimore, M.A., Jacobs, R.J., Bailey, I.L. and Gandhi, N. (1994) An objective
measure of discomfort glare. J. Illuminating Eng. Soc., 23(2), 40–49.
Berman, S.M., Fein, G., Jewett, D.L. and Ashford, F. (1993) Luminance-controlled pupil size
affects Landolt-C task performance. J. Illuminating Eng. Soc., 22(2), 150–165.
Berman, S.M., Fein, G., Jewett, D.L. and Ashford, F. (1994) Landolt-C recognition in elderly
subjects is affected by scotopic intensity of surround illuminants. J. Illuminating Eng. Soc.,
23(2), 123–130.
Berman, S.M., Greenhouse, D.S., Bailey, I.L., Clear, R. and Raasch, T.W. (1991) Human
electroretinogram responses to video displays, fluorescent lighting and other high frequency
sources. Optometry and Vision Sci., 68, 645–662.
Bjørset, H.-H. and Frederiksen, E. (1979) A proposal for recommendations for the limitation of
the contrast reduction in office lighting. Proc. 19th Session of the Commission Internationale
de l’Éclairage, Kyoto, Japan (CIE Publication no. 50, 310–314). Paris: Bureau Centrale de
la CIE.
Blascovich, J. and Kelsey, R.M. (1990) Using electrodermal and cardiovascular measures of
arousal in social psychological research. In C. Hendrick and M.S. Clark (eds), Research
Methods in Personality and Social Psychology, 45–73. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Boyce, P.R. (1979) Users’ attitudes to some types of local lighting. Lighting Res. and Technol.,
11, 158–164.
Boyce, P.R. (1996) Illuminance selection based on visual performance – and other fairy stories.
J. Illuminating Eng. Soc., 25(2), 41–49.
220 Veitch
Boyce, P.R., Beckstead, J.W., Eklund, N.H., Strobel, R.W. and Rea, M.S. (1997) Lighting the
graveyard shift: the influence of a daylight-simulating skylight on the task performance and
mood of night-shift workers. Lighting Res. Technol., 29, 105–134.
Brainard, G.C. and Bernecker, C.A. (1996) The effects of light on human physiology and
behavior. In Proceedings of the 23 rd Session of the Commission Internationale de l’Éclairage,
New Delhi, India, November 1–8, 1995, vol. 2, 88–100. Vienna: Bureau Centrale de la CIE.
Burger, J.M. (1989) Negative responses to increases in perceived personal control. J. Personality
and Soc. Psychol., 56, 246–256.
Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (1994) Code for Interior Lighting. London:
CIBSE.
Commission Internationale de l’Éclairage (1987) International Lighting Vocabulary, CIE
Publication no. 17.4. Vienna: Bureau Centrale de la CIE.
Czeisler, C.A., Johnson, M.P., Duffy, J.F., Brown, E.N., Ronda, J.M. and Kronauer, R.E. (1990)
Exposure to bright light and darkness to treat physiologic maladaptation to night work. New
Engl. J. Med., 322, 1253–1259.
Dowling, J.E. (1987) The Retina. An Approachable Part of the Brain. Harvard, CT: Belknap
Press.
Eysel, U.T. and Burandt, U. (1984) Fluorescent light evokes flicker responses in visual neurons.
Vision Res., 24, 943–948.
Fisk, W.J. and Rosenfeld, A.H. (1997) Estimates of improved productivity and health from
better indoor environments. Indoor Air, 7, 158–172.
Gifford, R. (1997) Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice, 2nd edn. Boston, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.
Gifford, R., Hine, D.W. and Veitch, J.A. (1997) Meta-analysis for environment– behavior
research, illuminated with a study of lighting level effects on office task performance. In G.T.
Moore and R.W. Marans (eds), Advances in Environment, Behavior, and Design, vol. 4,
223–253. New York: Plenum.
Gregory, R.L. (1978) Eye and Brain: the Psychology of Seeing, 3rd edn. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Halonen, L. (1993) Effects of Lighting and Task Parameters on Visual Acuity and Performance,
NTIS No. PB94–179231. Espoo, Finland: Helsinki University of Technology.
Halonen, L. and Lehtovaara, J. (1995) Need of individual control to improve daylight utilization
and user’s satisfaction in integrated lighting systems. Proc. 23rd Session of the Commission
Internationale de l’Éclairage, New Delhi, India, 1–8 November 1995 (vol. 1, 200–203).
Vienna: Bureau Centrale de la CIE.
Hawkes, R.J., Loe, D.L. and Rowlands, E. (1979) A note towards the understanding of lighting
quality. J. Illuminating Eng. Soc., 8, 111–120.
Hedge, A., Sims, W.R. and Becker, F.D. (1995) Effects of lensed-indirect and parabolic lighting
on the satisfaction, visual health, and productivity of office workers. Ergonomics, 38, 260–
280.
Heerwagen, J.H. and Heerwagen, D.R. ( 1986). Lighting and psychological comfort. Lighting
Des. Appl., 16(4), pp. 47–51.
Katzev, R. (1992) The impact of energy-efficient office lighting strategies on employee
satisfaction and productivity. Environ. and Behav., 24, 759–778.
Use of lighting 221
Knez, I. (1995) Effects of indoor lighting on mood and cognition. J. Environ. Psychol., 15, 39–
51.
Landy, F.J. (1985) Psychology of Work Behavior. Homewood, IL: Dorsey.
Lindner, H. and Kropf, S. (1993) Asthenopic complaints associated with fluorescent lamp
illumination (FLI): the role of individual disposition. Lighting Res. Technol., 25, 59–69.
Loe, D.L., Mansfield, K.P. and Rowlands, E. (1994) Appearance of lit environment and its
relevance in lighting design: experimental study. Lighting Res. Technol., 26, 119–133.
Loe, D.L., Rowlands, E. and Watson, N.F. (1982) Preferred lighting conditions for the display of
oil and watercolour paintings. Lighting Res. Technol., 14, 173–192.
Miller, N., McKay, H. and Boyce, P.R. (1995) An approach to a measurement of lighting quality.
Proc. of the Annual Conference of the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America,
New York, 29–31 July. New York: IESNA.
Newsham, G.R. and Veitch, J.A. (1997) Energy-efficient lighting options: predicted savings and
occupant impressions of lighting quality. CLIMA 2000 Conference, Brussels, 30 August–1
September.
Norman, D.A. (1976) Memory and Attention. New York: Wiley.
Ooyen, M.H.F. van, Weijgert, J.C.A. van de and Begemann, S.H.A. (1987) Preferred luminances
in offices. J. Illuminating Eng. Soc., 16(2) 152–156.
Pansky, S.H. (1985) Lighting standards: tracing the development of the lighting standard from
1939 to the present. Lighting Des. Appl., 15(2), 46–48.
Pritchard, R.D. (1992) Organizational productivity. In M.D. Dunnette and L.M. Hough (eds),
Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2nd edn, vol. 3, 443–471. Palo
Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists’ Press.
Rea, M.S. (ed.) (1993) Lighting Handbook: Reference and Application, 8th edn. New York:
Illuminating Engineering Society of North America.
Rea, M.S. and Ouellette, M.J. (1991) Relative visual performance: a basis for application.
Lighting Res. Technol., 23, 135–144.
Roethlisberger, F.J. and Dickson, W.J. (1939) Management and the Worker. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Rosenthal, N.E. (1993) Diagnosis and treatment of seasonal affective disorder (clinical
conference). J. Am. Med. Assoc., 270, 2717–2720.
Rowlands, E., Loe, D.L., Waters, I.M. and Hopkinson, R.G. (1971) Visual performance in
illuminance of different spectral quality. Paper presented at the 17th Session of the Commission
Internationale de l’Éclairage, Barcelona.
Rubin, A. (1987) Office Design Measurements for Productivity – a Research Overview (National
Bureau of Standards Report NBSIR 87-3688). Washington, DC: Department of Commerce.
Sanders, M., Gustanski, J. and Lawton, M. (1974). Effect of ambient illumination on noise level
of groups. J. Appl. Psychol., 59, 527–528.
Sanders, P.A. and Bernecker, C.A. (1990) Uniform veiling luminance and display polarity affect
VDU user performance. J. Illuminating Eng. Soc., 19(2), 113–123.
Sanders, P.A. and Collins, B.L. (1996) Post-occupancy evaluation of the Forrestal Building. J.
Illuminating Eng. Soc., 25(2), 89–103.
Schneider, C.W. (1968) Electrophysiological analysis of the mechanisms underlying critical
flicker frequency. Vision Res., 8, 1235–1244.
222 Veitch
Simpson, M.D. (1990) A flexible approach to lighting design. Proc. CIBSE National Lighting
Conference, Cambridge, 8–11 April, 182–189. London: Chartered Institution of Building
Services Engineers.
Snow, C.E. (1927) Research on industrial illumination. The Tech Eng. News, 8(6), 257, 272–
274, 282.
Spillman, L. and Werner, J.S. (1990) Visual Perception: the Neurophysiological Foundations.
San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Stone, P.T. (1992) Fluorescent lighting and health. Lighting Res. Technol., 24, 55–61.
Tam, E.M., Lam, R.W. and Levitt, A.J. (1995) Treatment of seasonal affective disorder: a
review. Can. J. Psychiatr., 40, 457–466.
Tregenza, P.R., Romaya, S.M., Dawe, S.P., Heap, L.J. and Tuck, B. (1974) Consistency and
variation in preferences for office lighting. Lighting Res. Technol., 6, 205–211.
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science,
185, 1124–1131.
Veitch, J.A. and Gifford, R. (1996a) Assessing beliefs about lighting effects on health, performance,
mood and social behavior. Environ. and Behav., 28, 446–470.
Veitch, J.A. and Gifford, R. (1996b) Choice, perceived control, and performance decrements in
the physical environment. J. Environ. Psychol., 16, 269–276.
Veitch, J.A., Hine, D.W. and Gifford, R. (1993) End users’ knowledge, preferences, and beliefs
for lighting. J. Interior Des., 19(2), 15–26.
Veitch, J.A. and Kaye, S.M. (1988) Illumination effects on conversational sound levels and job
candidate evaluation. J. Environ. Psychol., 8, 223–233.
Veitch, J.A. and McColl, S.L. (1995) On the modulation of fluorescent light: flicker rate and
spectral distribution effects on visual performance and visual comfort. Lighting Res. Technol.,
27, 243–256.
Veitch, J.A. and Newsham, G.R. (1996) Determinants of lighting quality II: Research and
recommendations. 104th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association,
Toronto, ERIC Document Reproduction Service no. ED408543.
Veitch, J.A. and Newsham, G.R. (1998a). Determinants of lighting quality I: state of the science.
J. Illuminating Eng. Soc., 27(1), 92–106.
Veitch, J.A. and Newsham, G.R. (1998b) Lighting quality and energy-efficiency effects on task
performance, mood, health, satisfaction and comfort. J. Illuminating Eng. Soc., 27(1),
107–129.
Venables, P.H. (1984) Arousal: An examination of its status as a concept. In M.G.H. Coles, J.R.
Jennings and J.A. Stern (eds), Psychophysiological Perspectives: Festschrift for Beatrice and
John Lacey, 134–142. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Wilkins, A.J. (1986) Intermittent illumination from visual display units and fluorescent lighting
affects movements of the eyes across text. Human Factors, 28, 75–81.
Wilkins, A.J., Nimmo-Smith, I., Slater, A. and Bedocs, L. (1989) Fluorescent lighting, headaches
and eye-strain. Lighting Res. Technol., 21, 11–18.
Wineman, J.D. (1982). The office environment as a source of stress. In G.W. Evans (ed.),
Environmental Stress, 256–285. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Woods, J.E. (1989) Cost avoidance and productivity in owning and operating buildings.
Occupational Med., 4, 753–770.
Use of lighting 223
Notes
1. Luminance is the quantity of luminous flux propagated in a given direction from a point
on a surface. Colloquially, this is what is generally meant when we speak of the brightness
of an object, although this use confuses the photometric quantity and the sensation of
brightness, which depends on the state of adaptation of the eye as well as the luminance of
the object (Rea, 1993).
2. Phototherapy using bright light exposure is a common treatment for seasonal affective
disorder, but this use has no bearing on general lighting practice. Interested readers are
directed to Rosenthal (1993) and Tam et al. (1995) for reviews.
3. Illuminance is the technical term for the area density of luminous flux incident on a
surface; colloquially, we speak of ‘light levels’. Lighting recommendations are specified in
terms of illuminance largely because this value is in the control of the lighting specifier,
although the visual system sees luminance, which is the product of illuminance and
reflectance. Reflectances of walls, furnishings, floors and ceilings determine luminance but
are usually not under the control of the person choosing the lighting.
Part 4
Concentration and
thinking
Chapter 14
Attention and performance in

the workplace
Roy Davis
Most of our activities in the workplace involve exercising skills of various kinds. Control
of these activities is organised at different levels in the nervous system, from relatively low
levels (such as keyboard skills) to relatively high levels (such as overall planning of a
project).
Attention, the conscious awareness of the task in hand, may be focused at different
levels. It is important for comfort and efficiency that it is focused at an appropriate level.
For example:
• if one is preparing a computer spreadsheet one doesn’t want to be distracted by a

sticky key or a malfunctioning mouse
• if one is leading a discussion on company policy one doesn’t want to be disturbed by
an erratic air-conditioning system.
In this chapter I shall look briefly at the characteristics of skilled tasks from the point of
view of their attentional demands, and give a few examples to show where better design
could lead to improvement in both comfort and efficiency.
At the outset it is worth noting that it is not just in the workplace that we exercise our
skills, but in all our everyday transactions with things and with people. As well as going to
work we play games involving all kinds of mental and physical effort for enjoyment. The
activity of playing the game is intrinsically satisfying. No external reward is necessary.
Sometimes the activities we carry out at work are intrinsically satisfying; often they are
not. The work may be carried out solely for the reward or pay external to the task. Pay is
clearly important for satisfaction at work, but there is no reason why we shouldn’t
attempt to make the skills we use at work as satisfying as those we use in play.
Hence my theme is not just a matter of making work comfortable, which was the intent
of many of the old ergonomists, but that of making it more enjoyable.
228 Davis
The nature of skills
Skills involve coordinated goal-directed activities. The criterion of success is whether the
goal is achieved, not whether a routine sequence of actions is accurately repeated (Bartlett,
1947).
The essence of a goal-directed system is that relevant information is taken in, a course
of action is formulated, the action is carried out and, if the system is working as it should,
it receives information back about the results of its action – the extent to which the goal has
been achieved.
When we engage in skilled activities we bring into action all kinds of goal-directed
systems at different levels. For example, the neuromuscular system that enables us to
grasp a pencil without either letting it slip or crushing it depends on information circulating
at the level of the neural control loops in muscles and joints, whereas the neurophysiological
system that enables us to point the pencil accurately at a target depends on different kinds
of information at a different level (the control loops involved in eye–hand coordination).
Higher-order cognitive decision-making systems require the input and analysis of other
kinds of information. Their proper functioning may depend on the integrity of the lower-
order systems, but the higher-order systems do not (usually) access the kind of information
which the lower systems are processing.
Attentional control may be moved between levels, but for the most fluent performance
it is best to direct attention at the highest level required by the task.
On the other hand, during training, attention may be directed at quite low levels of task
organisation. For example:
• how to control the limbs when making a stroke at tennis/cricket

• how to control the fingers when developing keyboard skills.
The result of training is to make actions at lower levels almost automatic. One no longer
has to think about them. Attention is left free to deal with organisation at a higher level.
In learning a skill we build up at each level an internal (neural) representation or model
of the way we interact with the external situation. Provided there is no radical change in the
situation, the model allows prediction or even anticipation of the next move, without
collecting and analysing further information. So the system becomes quicker to react and
generally more efficient. Attention is left free to deal with organisation at a higher level so
that one can think in terms of strategy, rather than moves (Fitts and Posner, 1967).
When, however, something goes wrong, if the external situation changes, or one is
disturbed by events, or otherwise stressed, attention is diverted back to the level where the
inconsistency or conflict occurs. The internal representation may have to be modified, the
Attention and performance 229
model reprogrammed, all of which may disrupt the task in hand, giving rise to feelings of
discomfort and dissatisfaction.
There is an old distinction which in some languages is preserved by using different
words) between:
• knowing that – propositional knowledge, which can be made explicit, and verbalised
• knowing how – procedural knowledge, which is often implicit and cannot be put
into words.
Procedural knowledge is very characteristic of skilled activities. Most people who can ride
a bicycle find it difficult, if not impossible, to describe how they do it. This is one of the
reasons why the best performers are not necessarily the best instructors.
Not only may we be unable to describe the constituents of skilled activities which we
carry out very competently, we may be unaware of them while we are carrying them out.
For an experienced driver the actions involved in changing gear become almost automatic;
they are carried out below the level of awareness. Only if something goes wrong is attention
directed towards them. Furthermore, when the task in hand is being carried out smoothly,
it may be disrupted if one tries to attend to what is going on at the level of constituent
activities.
The centipede was happy, quite,

Until the toad in fun
Said, ‘Pray, which leg comes after which?’
This raised his doubts to such a pitch
He fell exhausted in the ditch,
Not knowing how to run.
These characteristics of skilled tasks have material consequences for the design of the
workplace:
• for training the novice – identifying and using appropriate information; making it
easy to deal with, without having to direct attention towards it
• for expert performance – recognising that highly organised processing of information
is going on below the level of awareness and that decisions/actions may be controlled
from this level (indeed, the smooth execution of the task in hand depends on such
organisation).
230 Davis
Now let me turn from talking about the characteristics of skilled activities to give a few
examples of principles which can be applied in the workplace.
The use of information in training
It is important to recognise that the information or ‘cues’ used by an expert at the job are
not necessarily those used spontaneously by a beginner. During training one must direct
the attention of the novice towards the appropriate cues.
For example, in training keyboard skills the novice may rely on vision for locating the
keys, whereas the expert relies on touch and proprioceptive information from the muscles
and joints, leaving vision free for reading text and monitoring the progress of the task.
This has very general application. For example, in all kinds of social interaction ‘cues’
are generated, such as a slight change in facial expression, or in tone of voice, Unless
attention is drawn to them a person may be unaware of producing such cues. A skilful
participant will be sensitive to the cues he/she is producing and in noticing the cues
generated by the other participant(s). Social skills of this kind are also susceptible to
training.
Different ways of presenting information
The way in which we deal with information depends a great deal on the way it is presented
to us. For a simple example, contrast the way in which the time of day may be presented
by an analog clockface as compared with a digital display (see Fig. 14.1).
Both show the same time of day, but the analog display is usually read as ‘twenty to
eleven’, whereas the digital display is usually read as ‘ten-forty’. Whereas a digital display
gives a clear read-out of the instantaneous value, an analog display may have an advantage
for judging intervals, estimating rates of change, or reading off the time one has to one’s next
appointment. One sees that there are twenty minutes to elapse before 11 o’clock, rather
than having to subtract 10.40 from a mental representation of 11.00 hours. If circumstances
lead to errors being made, the type of error generated by misreading a digital display will be
different from that generated by misreading an analog display. For example, one may
confuse visually similar figures in a digital display, whereas one may mistake the hour hand
for the minute hand in an analog display.
There is a long and tragic history of aviation accidents attributed to pilots misreading
their height above ground level as a result of confusing the pointers in the 3-pointer
altimeter, a design which was used for years in civil and military aircraft (Fitts, 1951;
Green, 1983).
Figure 14.1 Analog and digital clock displays
Using visual symbols/icons to convey information or

instructions
With the expansion of international trade and travel there is an increasing use of symbolic
displays to provide information and to give instructions. A visual symbol may be used to
supplement, or replace entirely, a written notice, which by its nature is language-specific. If
the symbol is well designed and generally understood its use can save much time and trouble.
If it is inappropriate it may be confusing, even hazardous.
Figure 14.2 shows traffic signs taken from the Highway Code (Department of Transport,
1996, 1999) which, presumably, are generally understood. Note the sign prohibiting the
passage of bicycles (Fig. 14.2(iv)), which is derived from thesign prohibiting the passage
232 Davis
Figure 14.2 Traffic signs from the Highway Code (1996)
of all vehicles (Fig. 14.2(iii)).

Figure 14.3(i) and (ii) shows signs that are also in common use. Referring to the
Highway Code one finds that (ii) is given as the sign prohibiting the passage of
pedestrians (similar in style to the sign prohibiting the passage of bicycles), but one
quite often sees the sign shown in (i) used for the same purposes! In fact, in earlier
versions of the Highway Code (e.g. 1968 edition), it is this sign, with the diagonal bar,
that is used to indicate ‘no pedestrians’.
What is one to make of this change in use in the Highway Code? It is widely
accepted that the diagonal bar indicates prohibition of the activity depicted, for example,
in ‘no smoking’ signs, and in the current Highway Code signs for prohibiting left, right
and U-turns (Fig. 14.2(ii)). The sign without the diagonal bar is interpreted differently
Figure 14.3 Alternative signs prohibiting the passage of pedestrians
by different people, and in different contexts. It creates confusion because the way it
is used conflicts with the expectations held by many people. Has it contributed to any
accidents? It is difficult to tell, because the kind of information it conveys tends to be
processed automatically. People are not aware of its potential ambiguity unless their
attention is drawn directly to it.
Interest in the relationship between signs and what they symbolise goes back to
classical antiquity. Plato’s dialogue Cratylus introduces a discussion on the principles
of naming, and raises many issues still unresolved today. To what extent is there a
‘natural’ relationship between a symbol and what it represents? What is the basis for
it? Does it depend on properties of the world common to everyone’s experience, or is
it specific to certain cultural, social and language groups (Brown, 1958)?
There is evidence that some relationships are found universally, whereas others are
culturally dependent. The way in which arbitrary shapes are matched with ‘nonsense’
sounds is consistent over a wide range of culture and language groups. For example,
there is good evidence for universal agreement that the sound produced by saying
‘TAKETE’ is a more appropriate match to the shape in Fig. 14.4(ii), than the sound of
either ‘MALUMA’ or ‘ULOOMU’, which are thought to be more appropriate to the
shape in Fig. 14.4(i) (Köhler, 1929; Davis, 1961). On the other hand, associations such
as those between colour and mood may be culturally determined (Davis, 1995). Of
course as cultural influences extend internationally, there is a tendency towards universal
interpretations of signs and symbols which were originally culture-specific.
This is not the place to attempt to sort out these issues, but I will give one example
to illustrate their application, in the design of visual displays for aircraft pilots. ‘Head-up’
234 Davis
Figure 14.4 Shapes similar to those used by Köhler (1929) and Davis (1961)
displays project information about the state of the aircraft (air-speed, altitude, compass
bearing, etc.), so it is seen through the windscreen in front of the pilot, superimposed on the
landscape in the background. For pilots of military aircraft, ‘helmet-mounted displays’ are
being developed on similar principles (Stinnett, 1989). The display may also be used to
provide information for the pilot about features in the surroundings which may not be seen,
perhaps because of bad weather conditions. This may require a symbolic representation of
some features, such as other aircraft in the vicinity, and it is important that these symbols are
interpreted unambiguously and as quickly as possible.
Figure 14.5 shows two alternative displays. One is intended to represent a flight of
aircraft identified as ‘friendly’, the other a flight not identified, or potentially hostile. If one
asks almost anyone in the general population to choose between the two displays as to
which best indicates ‘friendly’ and which indicates ‘hostile’, there will be almost universal
agreement. One may argue about the reason why, but one neglects these relationships at
one’s peril.
Stimulus–response compatibility
Our consideration of skilled activities has shown that we build up expectations about the
way in which the artefacts we construct relate to things in the external world, and I have
given examples of the kind of expectations people have when interpreting visual signs and
symbols.
Another kind of expectancy may be described in terms of stimulus– response
compatibility. When one is required to select a response on the basis of information presented
in some kind of display, the way in which the information is presented may suggest that one
kind of response is more appropriate than another.
Figure 14.6(i) is an example of high stimulus–response compatibility,simple spatial
Figure 14.5 Visual displays of the kind used for pilots of military aircraft
correspondence The button to be pressed is immediately opposite the signal light

(although it could have been designed otherwise). In Fig. 14.6(ii) the relationship
between display and control is more problematic; it rather depends on the assumptions
about what it is one is controlling. In Fig. 14.6(iii) the most compatible relationship
between the numerical display and the response panel seems obvious, but perhaps
only for those who are accustomed to using numerals in the context of a general habit
of reading text from left to right? In Fig. 14.6(iv) one would generally move a control
to the right to move a display value upwards (and both would be described as an
‘increase’) but this is not always the case.
The controls of gas and electricity cookers show an interesting variation. To increase
the heat from an electric cooking ring the control knob must be rotated clockwise,
whereas to increase the heat from a gas ring the control knob must be rotated
anticlockwise. Although many people have carried out these actions on both types of
cooker many times in their lives, their knowledge about which way the knobs should
be turned may remain totally implicit, and when questioned they may be unable to say
(Oborne, 1987).
236 Davis
Figure 14.6 Types of stimulus–response compatibility
Natural objects often show ‘affordances’. By their very look they invite certain
actions (Gibson, 1979). Artefacts can be designed to show such affordances. A door
handle can visually suggest ‘push me’ or ‘pull me’. When the design fits the function
all goes well, but all too often it does not.
Figure 14.7 is a diagram of a passenger exit door on the Barcelona Metro, Line 1.
This is a very pleasant line to travel on, but the exit doors present a problem. They
open automatically once the door latch is released, but to do this the passenger has to
push the latch in the direction shown as ‘a’. This is contrary to expectation, and
Figure 14.7 Door latch, Barcelona Metro, Line 1
against the movement of the door as it starts to open. It is quite common to see visitors to the
city struggling with the door latch and sometimes failing to get out at their chosen station!
A similar problem arose with the latch used to lock the toilet door on some British Rail
InterCity trains a few years ago. Figure 14.8(i) shows, from inside the door, the latch in the
‘locked’ position. It became obvious that because of the way the latch was fitted, many
passengers regarded this as the ‘open’ position and confusion arose when trying to get out.
The design was subsequently modified by engraving an arrow on the latch handle to show
which way to move it (Fig. 14.8(ii)). But perhaps it could have been solved by fitting the
latch the other way round in the first place (Fig. 14.8(iii))?
I use these examples to illustrate a simple point. If one gets the design right, if it fits in
with people’s expectations, the action at this level is carried out ‘automatically’ without
having to divert attention. If expectations are contravened, attention has to be redirected, and
one’s whole pattern of thought and behaviour may be disturbed. The point may be simple,
but how often is it ignored in practice?!
238 Davis
Figure 14.8 Door latch, British Rail InterCity toilets
Before leaving this theme may I give one more example of recent folly, in the design
of numeric keypads.
Figure 14.9(i) shows the arrangement used for telephones. Figure 14.9(ii) shows
the arrangement used for calculators and computer keypads. Why should they be
different? Many people reveal on casual questioning that they are unaware of the
difference. Does it matter? It may! Tapping in well-rehearsed codes tends to become
an almost automatic procedure. If one transfers the habit of entering a code from one
keyboard to another there is a potential source of error. If one has to divert attention
to observe precisely which keyboard layout is in front of one, it slows one down and
may be distracting. It is a further hazard in trying to use the computer for telephone
dialling.
Figure 14.9 Numeric keypad layouts for telephone, calculator/computer, cash-point
When it comes to keypads at bank cash-points, the situation becomes even more
confusing. In Britain the telephone layout seems to have gained dominance for cash-
points, but in continental Europe one can find either arrangement in different banks in
the same street. I have even seen one arrangement used by a particular bank for a
publicity display in their window and the other arrangement used for its own cash-
point at the entrance to the bank.
Relating psychological variables to physical

variables
We have seen how, when using one device to control one variable in the physical
world, unfortunate design can cause difficulties for the user. When several variables
have to be controlled it can become even more confusing. I take an example from
Donald Norman (1990) of a situation which at one time or another confronts all
travellers – that of using the hotel shower.
What you want to control (‘the psychological variables’) are:
• the temperature of the water (how hot?)

• the flow (how much?)
240 Davis
The way the system usually works is that ‘hot’ water is produced at a fixed temperature
and the flow of ‘hot water’ is controlled by one tap. The flow of ‘cold water’ is controlled by
another tap, and one has to regulate the temperature of the shower by mixing the flows from
the ‘hot’ and the ‘cold’ taps.
So the ‘physical variables’ to be controlled are:
(a) the flow of water in the ‘hot’ tap

(b) the flow of water in the ‘cold’ tap.
The temperature and the flow of water interact, so that in order to change one of them one
inevitably has to change the other, with consequent problems of adjustment, aggravated by
the delay between the user’s action and the system’s response. (This delay is something
which always has to be taken into account in the design of control and communication
systems, whether physical or human, or a mixture of both (Wickens, 1992).)
There are, of course, various designs of ‘mixer’ taps, some with elaborate multi-function
controls, but many of them seem to aggravate the problem, leaving the unaccustomed user
even more baffled.
One recommendation we can derive from this example is that the mapping of physical
variables onto psychological variables should be as straightforward as possible. People find
it very difficult to cope with interaction of this kind between the variables they are trying to
control. In Donald Norman’s terms the system should be as transparent as possible to the
user (Norman and Draper, 1986).
The controls should feel good. They should inspire confidence. The level of control
should be appropriate. The system should be responsive, and if the quality of control is
good, people will enjoy using it.
How to take account of the user?
Most designers nowadays are well aware of the importance of taking account of the user,
both during the design process and after the user’s experience of the finished product.
However, a word of caution may be needed!
One of the commonest ways of taking account of the views of potential users is by
administering questionnaires, perhaps supplemented by interviews, open-ended or structured,
with varying degrees of constraint. In most cases the information from the user is in the form
of verbally expressed responses (whether spoken or written). This information is very
valuable, but it may not be enough.
I will pass over the fact that in an interview, or when answering questionnaires, people
may not say what they mean, for all kinds of reasons, which are well documented. More
significant for my theme today is the fact that much of the information which people have
stored inside them, which they use in work and play and in all everyday activities, is not
accessible to verbal description. It is implicit procedural knowledge, not explicit propositional
knowledge.
Hence it becomes very important to watch what people do, and analyse their behaviour,
as well as to listen to what they say.
I think it was John Christopher Jones (1992) who said that design is the process of
making external what is normally internal, or, if I may paraphrase, making explicit the
implicit. People may not be able to say, perhaps not even realise what they would like, but
they know a good thing when they see one, or rather after they have experienced one.
So what a real designer has to do is dig out from the users their implicit knowledge, and
put it to use, not just as it is, but extrapolate from it, to anticipate what the users are going
to need, going to like, in the future. This requires a combination of skills and insight which
not many people possess, but it is a goal we can set ourselves, and train our students to
accomplish.
References
Bartlett, F.C. (1947) The measurement of human skill, Br. Med. J., 1, 835–838, 877–880.
Brown, R. (1958) Words and Things. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.
Davis, R. (1961) The fitness of names to drawings, a cross-cultural study in Tanganyika. Br. J.
Psychol., 52, 3, 259–268.
Davis, R. (1995) The basis for intersensory relations. Cognitive or emotional? Proc. 8th
Congress, European Society for Cognitive Psychology, Rome.
Department of Transport (1996) The Highway Code. London: HMSO.
Fitts, P.M. (1951) Engineering psychology, in Handbook of Experimental Psychology (ed. S.S.
Stevens). New York: Wiley.
Fitts, P.M. and Jones, R.E. (1961) Psychological aspects of instrument display. Analysis of 270
‘pilot-error’ experiences in reading and interpreting aircraft instruments, in Selected Papers
on the Design and Use of Control Systems (ed. H.W. Sinaiko). New York: Dover.
Fitts, P.M. and Posner, M.L. (1967) Human Performance. Belmont, CA: Brooks/ Cole.
Gibson, J.J. (1979) The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston, MA: Houghton
Mifflin.
Green, R.G. (1983) Aviation psychology. Br. Med. J., 286, 1880–1882.
Jones, J.C. (1992) Design Methods, 2nd edn. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Köhler, W. (1929) Gestalt Psychology. New York: Liveright.
Norman, D.A. (1990) The Design of Everyday Things. New York: Doubleday.
Norman, D.A. and Draper, S.W. (1986) User Centred System Design, Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Oborne, D.J. (1987) Ergonomics at Work, 2nd edn. Chichester: Wiley.
Stinnett, T.A. (1989) Human factors in the super cockpit, in Aviation Psychology (ed. R.S.
Jensen). Aldershot: Gower Technical.
Wickens, C.D. (1992) Engineering Psychology and Human Performance, 2nd edn. London:
Harper Collins.
Chapter 15
Concentration and attention:

new directions in theory and
assessment
David A. Schwartz and Stephen Kaplan
Introduction
The human being is a highly adaptable animal. It can survive and even accomplish things
under a wide range of circumstances. While this adaptability is an admirable asset it can at
times be a serious liability. The reason for this is simple. People who adapt to an unfriendly
environment – for example a poor work situation – may appear not to be handicapped by the
inadequacy of the setting. In general this is an illusion: there are costs, but they are frequently
hidden. The costs of an unfriendly work environment, for example, might appear at home
rather than on the job. Or they may be reflected in work productivity, but not recognised as
related to problems in the setting. Employee characteristics such as irritability and
distractibility might be attributed to the person rather than to the setting. To the extent that
costs are hidden and unrecognised, careful analysis will not be carried out and corrective
action will not be taken.
Given these problems, the main purposes of this chapter are: (1) to make visible these
often hidden consequences – both conceptually and as they express themselves in the
workplace; (2) to describe possible interventions to eliminate these unfortunate consequences;
and (3) to examine some ways of assessing the effectiveness of these interventions. Our
intention is to introduce the conceptual underpinning of this approach in as intuitive a way
as possible. For a more rigorous treatment of the conceptual issues and a description of the
considerable empirical work that supports this approach, see Cimprich (1993) and Kaplan
(1983, 1995).
What constitutes mental effort?
A useful way to think about the often hidden costs of an unfriendly environment is in terms
of mental effort. Mental effort, in turn, is importantly related to the difficulty of what we are
Concentration and attention 243
trying to do. At every moment of our waking lives we find ourselves attending to or thinking
something, but not all forms of thought are equally taxing. Compare, for example, the
experience of daydreaming with the experience of studying train schedules. They differ
certainly with respect to content, but also with respect to how much mental effort we need
to expend in the process. Another example: compare the experience of sitting in a cafe
watching the parade of passers-by with the experience of trying to remember where you left
your keys when you emptied your pockets last night. Again, the two experiences differ with
respect to content, but also in terms of the amount of mental effort each demands. If we were
to consider a large number of such comparisons, we would discover that two factors seem to
distinguish those situations that demand mental effort from those during which our thoughts
seem to unfold effortlessly.
Goals and obstacles
First, we tend only to exercise mental effort in the service of some goal. The nineteenth-
century psychologist William James wrote that ‘We never make an effort to attend to an
object except for the sake of some remote interests which the effort will serve’ (1892, p. 88).
When we have no particular goal or purpose in mind, we let the outer world’s impressions
and the shifting contents of memory and imagination carry us where they will. Once we
undertake to achieve some desirable future state, however – that is, once we set ourselves
some goal – certain phenomena in the world or bits of information in our minds take on
greater salience than do others. And because of their greater relevance for the accomplishment
of our aims, these salient objects and ideas attract our attention and we dwell on them more
than we might otherwise, plucking them, as it were, from the stream of ongoing thought.
A goal, therefore, seems a necessary condition for mental effort. It is not, however, a
sufficient condition. Goal-directed thought, like goal-directed action, is effortful only when
obstacles exist to its completion. Examples of physical obstacles, such as impassable
mountains and unfordable rivers, come readily to mind, but obstacles may also be psychological
in nature. Suppose, for example, a man hiking down a trail comes to a point at which the path
branches into two forks. No physical barrier blocks his path, but none the less he finds that
he can’t proceed. Why? Because he doesn’t know which fork to take. Uncertainty, therefore,
is one kind of psychological obstacle.
While the lack of information can paralyse action, a surfeit of information can prove
equally disruptive. This latter kind of psychological obstacle occurs whenever one confronts
multiple sources of information, whether in the world or in one’s memory, all of which
impinge on awareness more or less simultaneously. In our lives we face this kind of
psychological obstacle more or less all the time, for at any given moment there exist numerous
sights, sounds, smells and so on to which we could attend, as well as an ample storehouse of
244 Schwartz and Kaplan
knowledge we could draw upon. Only a small subset of the information available to us,
however, is likely to be relevant to any particular goal we might undertake. It’s useful, for
example, to draw upon one’s knowledge of aerodynamics when attempting to sail a boat, but
not when choosing a wine to drink with dinner. It is useful to focus on a street sign when
finding one’s way in an unfamiliar neighbourhood, but not when attempting to cross the
street safely. Thus, effective functioning requires the ability to select, both from our knowledge
and from the world, the information most relevant to our goal, and to stave off the interference
from the rest. Let us, therefore, define concentration as this process of selecting from
among multiple sources of information those most relevant to some goal, and of
managing the interference from non-selected sources.
Note that while we are often aware of ourselves selecting one type of information and
rejecting another, nothing in the proposed definition requires consciousness of the selection
process. When our powers of concentration are operating effectively, in fact, we may be
totally unaware that we are constantly rejecting information irrelevant to our momentary
goals. When our powers of concentration begin to flag, however, we may find it increasingly
difficult to ignore irrelevant information, and so increasingly may notice things that we
previously had unconsciously suppressed. A concrete example may serve to illustrate the
point. A colleague sometimes leaves his office door open when he works at his desk. The
desk faces the door, and the door opens on to a long hall that accommodates considerable
pedestrian traffic over the course of the day. He has found that in the morning, while working
on some task, he hardly notices the steady passage of people in the hall outside. By the end
of the afternoon, however, his head reflexively jerks up each time a person passes by, and he
finds it necessary to close the door in order to sustain attention to the work at hand. An
undergraduate student recently described to us an experience that may be another example of
a decline over time in the ability to screen out interference. He typically studies during the
evening in his dormitory room, and finds that the music emanating from the adjacent room
seems to grow steadily louder as the evening progresses.
Mental fatigue
The examples above suggest, and experimental studies confirm, that certain limits exist on
our capacity to concentrate, such that after periods of sustained mental effort we find it more
difficult to focus our attention or to manage interference in pursuit of some goal. The reader
no doubt has experienced the phenomenon of ‘mental fatigue’ in his or her own life, and so
understands intuitively both the feelings and the consequences associated with this state of
mind. The fatigued state is, in fact, so familiar that most people probably accept it simply as
a fact of life without questioning why the human mind should be susceptible to this sort of
cognitive impairment. And yet, why should the mind tire? If, as we have argued, achieving
goals often requires the ability to select from among multiple sources of information and to
manage interference, why should evolution not have equipped us with the capacity to
concentrate without wearying for hours, for days, for however long it might take to achieve
a given goal? Nobody knows for certain, but comparisons with other species may offer some
clues.
Anyone who has observed trained sheep dogs herding a flock, for example, can attest to
the intensity of concentration and stamina these animals bring to their work. Hundreds of
generations of selective breeding have produced a dog that will perform physically and
intellectually demanding work for hour after hour without tiring. One handler has written
that male border collies working stock will neglect to eat and will even ignore females in heat.
Much as an employer or manager might admire this kind of workaholism on the part of an
employee, the process of natural selection clearly would not favour the ability to concentrate
tirelessly on tasks that serve no intrinsic survival or reproductive purpose. Perhaps in the
future corporations will attempt to engineer fatigue-resistant employees just as the British
highlanders have engineered the traits of the border collie. In the meantime, we shall have to
design our workplaces around the limitations of a creature that is easily distracted not only
by food and sex, but by many other types of interference as well.
Mental effort and mental fatigue in the workplace
On the job, the sources of interference that tax our powers of concentration can be either
intrinsic to a given task or extraneous. Intrinsically demanding tasks are those that, for
example, require us to consider several ideas at once, to generate and evaluate alternatives, to
analyse complex data sets, to plan and organise, to bring order to a confusing mass of
information, to coordinate the work of several people, and so on. What all these tasks have
in common is that they present a worker with a problem that often has no obvious or routine
solution, a problem which by virtue of its complexity defies the application of any simple
algorithm. When faced with such a situation, one must explore the problem space, conceive
and compare alternatives, take account of various constraints, select a particular interpretation
or course of action, and proceed to the next stage of the process. In a word, intrinsically
demanding tasks require one to think, and thinking, as we all know, is hard work.
Is the banishment of effort a useful strategy?
Suppose, now, a consultant proposes that your company could increase productivity by
decomposing all intellectually demanding tasks into a sequence of simple if–then rules that
direct an employee’s thought along prescribed pathways, thus freeing the worker from
having to exercise any judgement. Should you embrace this proposal? Probably not. First,
one usually cannot anticipate all possible situations that may arise on the job for which some
action may be needed. Thus, there is no getting away from the need for considered judgement.
And even were it possible to engineer tasks in a way that allowed for their mindless
performance, we ought not to do so, because when we remove opportunities for exploration,
for creativity and experimentation, and for wrestling with uncertainty, we undermine the
very conditions that nurture excellence on the job. Moreover, we end up removing those
features that make intellectually demanding work so satisfying and which thus attract and
retain talented people to our organisations. In their perceptive analysis of outstanding
companies, Peters and Waterman (1982) emphasised the importance of what they called
‘productivity through people’. In successful companies, Peters and Waterman observed,
managers challenged employees to take on increasing responsibility in the workplace and to
explore possible innovations that might improve the company’s performance. Thus, far
from freeing the employee from the challenges of thinking and decision, there are strong
arguments for moving in the opposite direction. Let us, therefore, take the intrinsic demands
on our powers of concentration as a given.
Sources of job interference
Extraneous sources of interference, however, are another matter entirely. Extraneous sources
of interference include such things as random noise, interruptions, lack of privacy, poor
lighting, that we can well do without. If we assume that both the extraneous and the intrinsic
sources of interference tax the same limited mental capacity, then the more mental effort one
expends managing extraneous interference, the less mental effort one can devote to the
intrinsic demands of the task at hand. Thus, the more inhospitable the work environment,
the more quickly will people’s effectiveness and productivity decline.
Consequences of fatigue
This decline can manifest itself in many different ways. For example, laboratory experiments
have found that when people become mentally fatigued they behave more impulsively and
exhibit greater distractibility. On the job, such lapses of attention and of impulse control can
undermine employees’ effectiveness, with severe, even lethal consequences. Supporting this
concern is a study of the relationship of mental lapses to auto accidents (Larson and Merritt,
1991). The authors examined the driving records of individuals who reported experiencing
frequent absent-mindedness and found that these people had caused a significantly higher
level of accidents. Translating this example to a work setting, one needs only to consider
some of the occupations for which lapses in attention could be particularly costly. Research
by Yoshitake (1978) provides thought-provoking examples. He found that people in certain
occupations were particularly likely to experience ‘difficulty of concentration’. The fatigue-
prone employees included ‘helicopter pilots, air-traffic controllers, key punchers, bank
clerks, broadcasting personnel, incinerator-plant operators, pharmacists and research workers’
(p. 232).
Fatigued people also tend to think and act in stereotyped, habitual, or routine ways.
They fail to notice subtle cues that make one course of action more appropriate than another,
attending instead to what is most obvious and performing in ways that are most familiar. In
their analysis of the central role of innovation in effective organisations, Peters and Austin
(1985) emphasise the importance of going round the formal structure and the usual ways of
doing things. Clearly this would be difficult for individuals suffering from fatigue.
Finally, fatigue induces impatience and irritability, which can increase feelings of tension
and hostility among coworkers and hamper progress on collaborative projects. A fatigued
workforce thus is likely to experience more on-the-job accidents, commit more careless
errors, conceive and/or implement fewer innovations, and experience more interpersonal
tensions than will a less fatigued workforce. All of this, of course, translates into lost
earnings, lost opportunities, and probably lost personnel. This would seem an ample incentive
for employers to identify ways to nurture employees’ cognitive functioning on the job.
Strategies of intervention
There are two categories of intervention for keeping mental fatigue levels under control. The
first involves the elimination or mitigation of sources of extraneous interference. There are a
wide range of possible interventions in this category. They can be as simple as installing
sound-dampening materials to reduce noise levels or as complicated as improving lines of
communication to reduce worker uncertainty. The second category involves interventions
that actually reduce fatigue. Since these events restore the individual to a pre-fatigued level
of effectiveness, they are referred to as restorative. In the context of the workplace, a
particularly helpful restorative intervention has been to provide a window with a view that
includes natural elements (Kaplan, 1993). A modest literature is available that provides both
conceptual and empirical guidance that could prove helpful in understanding, identifying,
and implementing appropriate interventions (Kaplan, 1995).
Assessing the effect of an intervention
Whatever changes one decides to introduce, some method for assessing whether the
intervention has achieved its desired effect is essential. Ultimately, the goal is to determine
whether the workplace changes have improved your organisation’s productivity.
‘Productivity’, however, means different things to different types of organisation. A
manufacturing concern will assess it differently to an educational or social service institution.
In addition, concentration ability is only one of several factors that influences how well the
members of an organisation perform their jobs. Motivation and knowledge, for example, also
matter a great deal. Thus, we will confine ourselves in this chapter to a discussion of tasks
psychologists have devised to assess basic cognitive processes, leaving the measurement of
productivity to those more familiar with the particular kind of work a given organisation
performs.
Although the tasks we describe below may seem dull and unrelated to the type of work
employees do on the job, we believe they are useful tools for assessing changes in a person’s
ability to concentrate; that is, to select goal-relevant information and to manage interference
posed by irrelevant information in memory or in the task environment. As we have seen, this
abstract ability is a prerequisite for successful performance across a wide range of activities
and settings.
The tasks
By way of summary, in our discussion thus far we have proposed that concentration is the
process of suppressing cognitive interference (‘mental noise’, if you will) in the service of
some goal. We have further suggested that sources of interference that tax our limited powers
of concentration can be either intrinsic or extraneous to one’s task, but that both types of
interference draw upon the same limited cognitive capacity. We infer, therefore, that reducing
the amount of extraneous interference workers confront on the job, or providing opportunities
for mental restoration, should improve their ability to suppress intrinsic interference, enabling
them to work better for longer periods of time. Each of the following tasks serves as a
measure of concentration because successful performance requires coping with some form of
intrinsic interference.
Hidden figures test (Witkin et al., 1971)
Each item of this timed paper-and-pencil task consists of a complex geometric figure within which
a simpler geometric pattern is embedded (Fig. 15.1). Some versions of the task specify which of
several simple target patterns is embedded in each complex figure, while others do not specify.
This is a test of your ability to tell which one of five simple figures can be found in a more
complex pattern. At the top of each page in this test are five simple figures lettered A, B, C,
D, and E. Beneath each row of figures is a page of patterns. Each pattern has a row of
letters beneath it. Indicate your answer by putting an X through the letter of the figure which
you find in the pattern.
NOTE: There is only one of these figures in each pattern, and this figure will always be
right side up and exactly the same size as one of the five lettered figures.
Now try these 2 examples.
The figures below show how the figures are included in the problems. Figure A is in
the first problem and figure D in the second.
Your score on this test will be the number marked correctly minus a fraction of the
number marked incorrectly. Therefore, it will not be to your advantage to guess unless
you are able to eliminate one or more of the answer choices as wrong.
You will have 10 minutes for each of the two parts of this test. Each part has 2
pages. When you have finished Part 1, stop. Please do not go on to Part 2 until you are
asked to do so.
DO NOT TURN THIS PAGE UNTIL ASKED TO DO SO.
Figure 15.1 Hidden figure task (© 1962 Educational Testing Service)
The participant’s task is to locate and trace the outline of the simple pattern embedded in
each complex figure. The participant’s score is the number of items completed correctly
within the allotted time.
Psychologists have traditionally used this task to study supposedly stable individual
differences in a cognitive factor, known variously as ‘field-dependence’, ‘flexibility of
closure’, and, most transparently, ‘perceptual disembedding skill’. While some
researchers have interpreted performance on the task as a measure of intelligence or
cognitive style, and have attempted to correlate performance on the task with other
psychological variables, it will suffice for our purposes to articulate those aspects of
the task that render it a suitable measure of concentration ability. On each item of the
task, a person must search for a target object within a visually noisy environment.
More technically, in order to locate the target pattern within the complex figure, a
person must impose a figure-ground segregation upon a scene that does not lend itself
easily to such parsing. Psychologically, the task thus calls upon many of the same
processes as does trying to discern the contours of a well-camouflaged animal.
Concentration comes into play because the person studies each complex figure with a
goal in mind (i.e. the location of the simple target figure) and because achieving the goal
requires overcoming the perceptual interference created by the context in which the
target is embedded.
Letter cancellation (Diller et al., 1974)
This task was designed to assess an individual’s capacity to sustain vigilance, but it
can also be conceptualised as a measure of one’s ability to pursue a goal in the face of
interference intrinsic to the task. The task consists of page containing rows of letters,
and individuals are instructed to locate and mark (e.g. by circling or striking through)
every instance of a particular character (Fig. 15.2). The individual’s score is the number
of targets correctly marked within the allotted time. In our own research we separately
record the number of errors of omission and of commission.
The task can be made difficult in several ways. First, one can select a target letter
that has few distinctive features, that is, a character that closely resembles one or more
other characters. In Fig. 15.2, for example, the target letter i closely resembles the
letter j. In fact the physical form of i is wholly subsumed within the form of j, thus
making discrimination difficult. The task can be made still more difficult by complicating
the instructions, such as by making the target a conjunction of two conditions. For
example, we might instruct participants to strike through only those instances of the
letter i that precede a vowel. One can vary the task in many other ways as well. The
letter cancellation task, like the hidden figures task, requires an individual to search for
a target within a visually noisy context, though in this case the target and its context
consist of recognisable symbols rather than arbitrary geometric shapes.
idfqjqigibijqifamjcjyirveitqdictigwcglomojsjejkt
dkeevjpqwovwegtpoinlvztpbyglitgrftcsnojcqgbmr
pnfmtdjihdwvsclierhsicekapniatzegfnjjiezsvjipcsl
hizsjilvcgljkjcsmanjitnjqeimvtozhgialtcpidqjivtho
gocjjjqpyvivsjjnyoptojijgbktcvlbtohjogbtsivehizi
imtgjcniligvlzpjleungwrbintcjptgnbhqdyeslitmrvb
eitqdictiewcglomojsjejktvztpbyglitgrftcsiojcqgbm
apnttzegfnjtezsvjdpcogwjqeimvtozhgialtcpiuqjivth
rbintcjpwcgiomojsjejktvztpbyglitgisvrftcsnojcqno
gljkjcsmanjitniqeimvtozhgdkeevjpqwovwegtpoivlb
vztpbyglitgrftcsnojcqgbmyidfqjqigibijqifamjcjyirj
djchdwvsclbrhsiwrkapnteiegjcnioigvlzpjleungwrad
cglomojsjejkivztpbygeitgwcglomojsjejktvztpbyglid
njitnjqeimvtozhgdkeevjpqwohizsjilvcgljkjcsmanjis
brhsiwrkapnttzegjcnieicvlapnttiegfnjtezsvjdikapnt
vshiunyopionpsgbktcvlbtohjonjitnjqeimvtozhidkee
ejktvzipbygpiqgwcglomojsilitgrftcsnojcqgbmiwvsc
brhsidkeevjpqwoviegtpoivlbhjglomojsjejktvztpblil
dwvsclbrhsiwrkapnttzegfhiasjilvcgljkjiesmanjnroi
wcglomojsjeiktvztpbygliagrmvtozhgialtcpidqjietpb
Figure 15.2 Letter cancellation task
Category-matching task (Purdum and Schwartz, 1995)
This task, adapted from Melnyk and Das (1992), was developed to assess an individual’s
ability to select one kind of information over another. Each page of the task contains
pictures from five different categories: boats, fish, balls, mammals, and fruit (Fig.
15.3). These pictures are arranged on each page in thirty-six pairs, with four pairs on
each of nine lines (Fig. 15.4). In about 20per cent of the pairs, both pictures are
Figure 15.3 Category match task items grouped by category (© 1995 Gary E. Purdum and
David A. Schwartz)
from the same category; these are the target pairs. The remaining pairs, in which
the two pictures are from different categories, are the distractor pairs. Participants
are instructed to draw a circle around each target pair, and only around the target
pairs. They are further instructed to work as quickly and as accurately as they can,
from left to right across the page beginning with the top row. When administering
the task to groups of people, we typically allot the participants 60 seconds to
complete as much of the task as they can. When administering to an individual, one
has the option of allowing the person to complete all three pages of the task and
measuring how long it takes the person to complete the task. Whichever timing
method one chooses, the number of correctly circled pairs serves as one score. In
addition, each participant receives a score for each of two kinds of errors: errors of
omission, in which a participant fails to circle a target pair, and errors of
commission, in which a participant circles a distractor pair.
Note that one member of each category appears physically more similar to
members of another category than to members of its own category. For example,
the kayak looks more like the banana than it does the sailboat, and the dolphin
looks more like the fish than it does the cat. We know from experimental research
that people judge physical similarity more quickly and easily than they do
categorical similarity. A person completing the task thus will be psychologically
predisposed to commit both errors of omission (by judging the dolphin and cat
as dissimilar) and errors of commission (by judging the banana and kayak as
similar). Close concentration is required to resist these error tendencies.
Melnyk and Das (1992) found that performance on their version of this
task discriminated between adolescent students classified as either good or
poor attenders on the basis of teacher ratings. They concluded that performance
on the exercise functions as a measure of individuals’ capacity to inhibit
responses to distractors, a capacity roughly synonymous with the ability to
concentrate. In our own research (Schwartz, 1994) we found that performance
on the task modestly predicted teenagers’ self-reports of focus, persistence,
self-control, and effectiveness, all aspects of functioning in which we
Figure 15.4 Sample page of category match task
believe concentration plays an important role. Furthermore, in a study of concentration

ability among University of Michigan undergraduates (Schwartz, 1995), we found
that performance on this task correlated negatively with self-reported forgetfulness
and mental fatigue.
The importance of multiple measures
There are many other simple pencil-and-paper tasks that one might profitably employ
as measures of concentration. In fact, we believe that many of the tasks
neuropsychologists use to assess frontal lobe functioning will serve as measures of
concentration. Let us conclude by emphasising that when one undertakes the assessment
of some workplace intervention on workers’ ability to concentrate, it is imperative to
administer a battery of several different measures. There is no pure measure of
concentration, and performance on any given task is a function of many different
factors. Administering only one measure, therefore, leads to a hopeless confounding of
concentration ability with the influence of other variables such as perceptual speed,
scanning strategies, memory and spatial and verbal fluency. By administering a variety
of tasks, and by employing the appropriate statistical analysis, we can study the
independent contribution of concentration ability to performance on the various tasks,
and how this ability changes in response to our attempts to enhance it.
Conclusions
It is our thesis that mental fatigue plays a profound, albeit often hidden role in
undermining productivity in the workplace. Since salaries are often the greatest single
budget item, in both the public and private sectors, Romm and Browning (1994) have
argued that even a modest increase in productivity can have substantial economic
benefit. In that case, mental fatigue seems too expensive to ignore. We have divided
possible interventions into two categories, those oriented to limiting fatigue-causing
factors and those that reduce fatigue directly. Noise control and the reduction of
distractions fall into the first category; providing a view of nature out the window, the
second. In neither case can or should the improvements be taken on faith. There are
measures that can provide useful indices of productivity, and hence of the degree to
which interventions have led to improvement. Ongoing research of this kind promises
not only to enhance employee productivity, but very likely, to enhance the quality of
workplace life as well.
References
Cimprich, B. (1993) Development of an intervention to restore attention in cancer patients.

Cancer Nursing, 16, 83–92.
Diller, L., Ben-Yishay, Y., Gerstman, L.J., Goodkin, R., Gordon, W. and Weinberg, J. (1974)
Studies in Cognition and Rehabilitation in Hemiplegia (Rehabilitation Monograph No. 50).
New York: New York University Medical Center Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine.
James, W. (1892) Psychology: The briefer course. New York: Holt.
Kaplan, R. (1993) The role of nature in the context of the workplace. Landscape and Urban
Planning, 26, 193–301.
Kaplan, S. (1983) A model of person–environment compatibility. Environ. Behav., 15, 311–
332.
Kaplan, S. (1995) The restorative benefits of nature: toward an integrative framework. J.
Environ. Psychol., 15, 169–182.
Larson, G.E. and Merritt, C.R. (1991) Can accidents be prevented? An empirical test of the
cognitive failures questionnaire. Appl. Psychol. Int. Rev., 40, 37–45.
Melnyk, L. and Das, J. (1992) Measurement of attention deficit: correspondence between rating
scales and tests of sustained and selective attention. Am. J. Mental Retardation, 96(6), 599–
606.
Peters, T.J. and Austin, N. (1985) A Passion for Excellence. New York: Random House.
Peters, T.J. and Waterman, R.H. (1982) In Search of Excellence. New York: Harper & Row.
Purdum, G.E. and Schwartz, D.A. (1995) Category match task (unpublished).
Romm, J.J. and Browning, W.D. (1994) Greening the Building and the Bottom Line: Increasing
Productivity through Energy-Efficient Design. Snowmass, CO: Rocky Mountain Institute.
Schwartz, D.A. (1994) The measurement of inhibitory attention and psychological effectiveness
among adolescents. Unpublished Master’s thesis, University of Michigan.
Schwartz, D.A. (1995) A naturalistic study of mental fatigue among college undergraduates
(unpublished).
Witkin, H.A., Oltman, P.K., Raskin, E. and Karp, S.A. (1971) A Manual for the Embedded
Figures Tests. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Yoshitake, H. (1978) Three characteristic patterns of fatigue symptoms. Ergonomics. 21. 231–
233.
Part 5
Case studies
Chapter 16
Managerial and employee

involvement in design
processes
Jean E. Neumann
The problem
During the course of organisational consultancy with clients who require assistance in
addressing changes or developments to social systems, I frequently have met or been
presented with strong feelings about the design, construction and use of buildings. The
people expressing these feelings tend to be the users of the building: managers and employees
of a sub-unit for whom the decision to expand, build or renovate their workplace was taken
elsewhere in the hierarchy of their larger organisation. In all the cases I have come across,
consultation of the users was practically non-existent. Attempts to exert even mild influence
were met by resistance from those personnel responsible for the design and building
processes. As a result, productivity suffered dramatically post-construction.
As an applied social scientist who has been working with issues of motivation and
cooperation since 1971, I find it hard to understand that well-established methods of
involvement and consultation seem to be underutilised in the construction industry.
Manufacturing, finance and retail industries have proved the productivity benefits of such
methods for at least three decades. The concept of user involvement has been progressively
important in information technology industries.
By increasing the involvement of the users of buildings in design and construction
processes, construction managers could help avoid the worst problems of productivity
caused by the construction industry in carrying out its work. The notion of the construction
‘client’ needs to be broadened from the joint executives who are commissioning the building
to include the managers and employees of the sub-unit(s) who will be using the actual
building. Efforts to decrease adversarial relationships within the construction supply
network can be expanded to introduce more cooperation with those who are going to be
using a building.
260 Neumann
Many different actors are engaged already in designing, constructing and using buildings.
They hold perceptions characteristic of their identities and positions which can work
against appropriate involvement and consultation of users. An understanding of the role of
perceptions in creating productive workplaces may help to motivate some willingness to
cooperate more actively with users.
My colleagues and I have identified a model of the construction process overlaid with
points of potentially useful involvement. Combined with knowledge about how to craft
involvement strategies, that model can serve as a guide for thinking through with clients the
questions, ‘which users should be involved, when, and about what issues?’. Much is
known about managerial and employee involvement in decision-making that can be applied
to the construction situation.
Even so, construction managers may not be willing to develop their competence in this
regard if it means extra meetings within the client system. A determination to contribute to
a genuinely productive workplace is needed. Three cases from my own experience illustrate
the negative impacts of inadequate involvement on workplace productivity.
The case of ‘no windows’
I had been awarded a significant consulting contract with the UK site of a multinational
chemicals corporation. The 20-year-old site was in the process of being expanded from one
to two facilities and products. Simultaneously, headquarters wanted the UK company to
introduce ‘group-based working’ on the shopfloor and to increase employee quality of
working life. In early summer, I arrived to begin consulting on these topics, delighted to be
visiting a particularly beautiful part of the country. The manager of the new plant offered
to walk me round the construction site. We dressed in protective gear and climbed steps,
looking at expansive empty floors and trying to imagine where the operators would be
located during their working hours. There were no walls built yet, and I was thrilled by the
terrific views surrounding the plant. I asked enthusiastically, ‘Where will the windows
be?’. The Plant Manager looked puzzled and said, ‘There are no windows.’ To my look of
amazement, he responded, ‘Do you think that matters?’.
My determined ‘Yes!’ seemed to confuse the Plant Manager even more. He took me to
speak with the Senior Construction Engineer, on secondment from headquarters. To make
a long story short, the Engineer explained that windows could not be put in the chemical
plants. Even though it would be six months before the walls were built, such a major
decision would hold up construction deadlines. My client system, the UK site, was a part
of the Manufacturing Division, whereas the Engineer worked for the Buildings Division.
Any major change would have to work its way up five levels of hierarchy to the Engineer’s
Involvement in design processes 261
boss and back down again. Attempts to influence the ‘no windows’ decision on the part of
the Plant Manager and his Managing Director failed.
A few years later, managers in the new plant complained that operators tended to
cluster at the doors during working hours. These same operators were caught engaging in
dangerous acts to entertain themselves during off-shifts. One particularly wild stunt was
reported in the national press. The lack of windows seemed to lure workers away from
their positions and contributed to an isolated workplace.
The designers, working in the headquarters’ Building Division, altered an existing standard
blueprint for the new UK plant. Their offices were located in the midst of an ugly, five-mile
maze of chemical plants and pipes. Windows were not a priority for them. The organisation
of design–build meant that the users of the factory, managed by a separate corporate
division, had practically no involvement in design. The Senior Construction Engineer,
eventually sympathetic to the problem, confided that his bonus depended on meeting his
deadlines and, besides, his family wanted to be gone from the UK by Christmas.
The case of the colour-coordinated floors
Productivity had been reliable for years within the Patents Department at the headquarters
of a European mining company. More recently, however, there had been an increase in
inter-office bickering and intra-departmental conflict. I was brought in to analyse the
problem and work with the partners on a solution. It quickly became apparent that the
workload had increased dramatically during the previous year. No new solicitors had been
hired, however, because the entire company was suffering a spending freeze. Partners had
been told that this freeze was in order to help the company to pay for its new headquarters
building.
To a person, all eighty employees reported hating the new building in advance of even
seeing it. For decades, the department had resided away from the main headquarters,
located in cramped but cosy wooden-panelled rooms winding throughout a Victorian office
block. Soon, they were to be moved into a new 25-floor skyscraper. Three qualities of the
new building’s design upset the solicitors. Firstly, each floor would be mostly open-plan
with only a handful of the most senior partners being given offices. In addition to the lack
of privacy afforded the majority of employees, special treatment for some violated the
department’s culture which underemphasised hierarchy and status. Secondly, the furniture
would be standardised chairs, desks and filing cabins. Desks were to be bolted to the floor
so the design could not be changed, and no family photos or other personalised touches
would be allowed. The solicitors felt this over-control contradicted their rights as individuals,
as well as forcing them out of a comfortable, idiosyncratic legal atmosphere into a ‘corporate
man’ culture. Lastly, the colour scheme of each floor was different: carpet, drapes, wall
262 Neumann
hangings and furniture were made to match the colour for that floor. The Patents Department
floor would be red.
A meeting was convened between the four Directing Senior Partners, the Facilities
Director and representatives from the construction management firm in charge of the new
building. The Partners expressed their concern at the damage the move would have on
productivity, and made some suggestions for ‘their floor’ to minimise the shock anticipated
to their departmental culture. While the Facilities Director sympathised, he was concerned
that changes would add to an already exorbitant construction bill. One of the architects was
less sensitive. After listening in silence for over an hour, he held forth for ten minutes about
the aesthetic beauty of the design, the concept underlying it and the general lack of artistic
taste in employees. Needless to say, the meeting did not result in any changes to plan.
I rang my client contact three months after the department had moved into the new
building. He reported that there had been a 30 per cent turnover in the department leading
up to and since the relocation. There was a general feeling that relations between senior and
junior partners were colder than before; a more formal atmosphere prevailed as
communications were more prescribed in the big open-plan office. ‘Quick chats in the
corridor’ or ‘popping into an office for a word’ no longer took place. The department had
been allowed to hire new solicitors, but those attracted to work in the new building seemed
a ‘different breed’ from those who had worked there before. My client contact had managed,
with some effort, to gain permission for photos and plants to be left on desks overnight.
The case of a great building that does not work
A European government department commissioned a new ‘operation central’ for one of its
agencies. As public relations was important for this agency, executives took a decision to
make sure that the building ‘looked great’ and contradicted a ‘stuffy reputation’. They
hired an internationally known architect to design the building, while managing the
construction using multiple contractors and subcontractors well-known to them. The cost
of an ambitious design with unusual materials put pressure on the agency to keep building
costs as low as possible. Another factor in terms of cost was the date on which the new
building could be occupied: the agency would incur additional expenditure for any delays,
which the Minister would not allow.
Pressures on costs and pressures on time created havoc among the nearly thirty
contractors and subcontractors. They blamed each other for delays and cost-overruns,
often suing one another to avoid being blamed by the agency. Many delays were due to
such factors as: mismatches between an ordered part (e.g. a window) and the space created
for the part; damage to designed materials when building did not go to plan; and difficulty
in scheduling specialist contractors in the correct sequence and in relation to other
contractors. Despite all these problems, the building was finished on time and attracted
pubic comments that it was ‘a great building’.
The building opened, however, before the landscaping was completed and most of the
operational equipment installed. For several months, employees complained of working
on a building site. This inconvenience was compounded by many petty ‘hygiene’ problems.
For example, the majority of doors stuck, requiring a hard push to open or close. The
restaurant equipment turned out to be too large for the space designed and built for it.
Employees had to improvise tables and cabinets to hold equipment, thus disrupting traffic
flows in some areas. Air-conditioning and heating functioned unevenly in many sections of
the building. Agency managers reported that morale remained low (and absenteeism high)
for months as employees adjusted to the disappointments of the ‘great building that does
not work’.
Attending to social and organisational perceptions
These three case stories illustrate the main points of my argument. The multiple actors
involved in designing, building and using workplaces have different roles and responsibilities.
From their positions within occupational groups and organisational contractors, they
perceive different priorities and needs for what constitutes a productive and healthy
workplace. Often the losers in this difference of perceptions are the users of the buildings.
From my professional value system, I think that users of buildings have a right to influence
the design of their working environment.
Perceptions held by multiple actors within the design–build process shape the degree to
which those buildings make a contribution towards productivity and well-being. The
perceptions of an expert in some aspect of construction can often result in a better quality
of working environment than lay users could desire or suggest themselves. Typical examples
include air quality, lighting, traffic flows, noise pollution and ergonomics. Other aspects of
construction, however, are open to wide interpretation and influenced by factors that have
little to do with potential workplace productivity as determined by experts or users. In
addition to the obvious example of aesthetic values, many elements of initial design
conception and specification requirements emerge from negotiation between designers,
contractors and those members of the client system who take executive decisions.
It is not unusual for each group of actors to experience their perceived needs and
opinions as more worthy than those of the other actors. The Senior Construction Engineer
in the chemicals plant considered the negative consequences of having to change his
construction schedule as more important than the negative consequences of the chemical
operators having to work without windows. Those in the final implementation stages of
building the new mining headquarters felt little empathy for the solicitors’ attachment to a
264 Neumann
‘legal culture’ working environment. And, the executives of ‘operation central’ were
determined to avoid additional expenditure for their budgets regardless of the discomfort of
employees or the chaos and financial losses to contractors.
Social and organisational forces often constitute barriers to recognising and incorporating
different perceptions into design and building processes. Financial limits would be mentioned
by most clients and construction managers as a shaping force in the designs that they
commission. However, the actual organisational structure and decision-making processes
within the client system emerge in these three cases as significant as well. The ‘discovery’
that windows might matter to the Manufacturing Division’s mandate for a better quality of
working life for its employees stood in direct opposition to the Buildings Division’s
construction schedule. Neither the Engineer nor the Plant Manager was sufficiently
convinced that such a social concern would be welcomed by their divisional vice-presidents
to justify raising it. Similarly, the ‘discovery’ that employee satisfaction might suffer in the
face of the colour coordination and open-plan designs for the new headquarters was hidden
from the executives involved. The executives of the government agency focused on the
appearance of the ‘great building’ and left more junior staff to struggle with the implications
of unreasonable and ineffective decisions.
Actors involved in design, building and use hold different roles and responsibilities.
Contained within social identities and organisational boundaries, these roles and
responsibilities encourage ways of looking at the numerous decisions necessary in the
construction industry. These ways of looking, or perceiving, result in decisions considered
positive by one group of actors and negative by others.
I am using the word ‘perception’ to mean these socially and organisationally supported
ways by which people view, feel and generally sense the tasks of designing and building.
Perception, in this meaning, does not concern primarily individually oriented ‘human
factors’ or ‘ergonomics’, notions which emphasise the physiological bases of human
sensation and perception. I focus, instead, on ways of thinking and apprehending the
world that have been socialised into the occupational and other identities held by the
people who make up the groups and organisations responsible for construction (Holti and
Standing, 1997).
My purpose is to illustrate how differing priorities and understandings of what is
important – embedded in the organisation of design, building and use – often result in
conflicting notions of what is a productive and healthy workplace. Further, such differences
in perception often carry with them ideas of superiority and other judgements of worth
that hinder genuine collaboration and problem-solving.
Sometimes those differences have to do with the design itself. The designers of the
chemicals plant did not consider windows necessary or important, even in a facility
located in an area of outstanding natural beauty: chemical operators often work without
windows. By contrast, they were very interested in the challenge presented by new
computerised technologies, and in linguistic difficulties of working with contractors from
throughout Europe. The Architect of the mining corporation’s headquarters felt strongly
about the superiority of his aesthetic sense over that of the solicitors. The Facilities
Manager, already overwhelmed by the task of dealing with a 25-floor building, considered
consistency easier to manage than the idiosyncratic concerns of a particular department.
The ambitious design of the ‘great building’ superseded usability. The agency’s middle
managers dealt with their thirty contractors as if they were building a standard design that
had been built many times before, not the unique design with many specialist materials and
subcontractors that their executive bosses had commissioned for them. When there is
relative harmony on the design, difference in perceptions focus on priorities for decision-
making and task implementation related to design and build processes.
All three cases indicate one result of inadequate consultation with a broad sample of the
user population. Mismatches between users’ perceptions and needs and the building
design only became apparent when the chemical plant and the mining headquarters were
almost built. At that point, schedules and budgets influenced the lack of action most
strongly. Individual needs, e.g. the Senior Construction Engineer’s bonus and the Architect’s
professional ideology, may play some role. However, perceptions of organisational decision-
making and occupational groups’ task flows play a more powerful role.
These aspects of organisational behaviour impact directly on the degree to which a
completed building can be turned into a productive workplace by those people who must
work within it. Ironically, in these instances, the productivity and well-being of designers
and builders tend to take priority over the productivity and well-being of users. Users are
then left to adjust themselves or those aspects of the building that can be made flexible.
As the three cases illustrate, some of the adjustments employees make are not in the
best interests of their employing organisations. Employees of the chemical plant enacted
feelings of isolation by leaving workstations to cluster at doors or in a central control room
that held computer ‘windows’ of all the plant. Solicitors left their jobs in the Patents
Department, while those remaining evolved a new way of working with new employees
that felt less productive than before. And employees of the ‘great building’ complained
bitterly of petty hygiene problems and enacted low morale through high absenteeism.
Broader, more effective participation of user groups could help avoid some of the
worst excesses of design and build processes. Construction management already involves
a complicated multiple party network; key players could be forgiven for not wanting
to add more. However, mechanisms for effective participation have been tested for
decades in other industries – notably manufacturing – and can readily be introduced
into construction. Such processes can go far in recognising and incorporating different
perceptions.
266 Neumann
Managerial and employee involvement in decision-

making
‘Involvement’ and ‘consultation’ are versions of a broader area of organisational

behaviour related to participation in decision-making. The terms and phrases have
changed over the years: employee participation, participative management, employee
involvement, employee empowerment, teamwork and flexibility, to name a few. But
the basic research underlying these seeming fads is strong and stable.
People are more likely to be motivated to implement decisions well that they have
had a role in shaping, however minor that role. Many lessons have been learned by
those in other industries who have worked extensively with involvement and
consultation processes. I think three are of particular importance to the issue of
managerial and employee involvement in design and construction processes. These can
be summarised as a general principle: involvement in design and construction processes
should be genuine, appropriate and interconnected.
Genuine involvement means that managers and employees are asked to participate
in decisions by their bosses only to the degree that their participation will really make
a difference to the outcome. Over the years, a range of participation has become well
recognised amongst researchers and practitioners (see Fig. 16.1). This range begins on
the left with less involvement (degree D), simply being informed in a face-to-face
setting about a change or development planned by another group of people, usually at
a higher level of hierarchy. From there, managers or employees might be consulted
about decisions that are being taken by others (degree C). The consultation certainly
takes the form of offering reactions, positive and negative, to any proposals. But it
might as well take the form of giving data or information prior to or after significant
points in decision-making.
Being involved (degree B) is a more engaged form of involvement. Those managers
or employees who are involved to this degree actively generate information, analyse
those data and develop options or proposals. They may also make recommendations.
This work then becomes the input for decisions taken elsewhere.
Finally, taking decisions is the most occupying form of participation (degree A) and
shows up on the right hand side of the continuum (see Fig. 16.1) Here there is no
difference between participation and taking decisions. People who take decisions
usually do so in small to medium-sized groups. Their decision may need to be ratified
elsewhere, but the power to conclude a decision lies with the group.
Genuine involvement, therefore, is a process of matching the degree of participation
with the actual authority available to groups of managers and employees by virtue of
their hierarchical or occupational position, or by powers invested in them by others
Figure 16.1 Continuum of degrees or range of participation in decision-making
whose hierarchical positions makes it possible. One of the main reasons why people do not
participate when given the chance (Neumann, 1989) is that the participation on offer is not
real. That is, managers or employees feel that they are being asked their opinion but no one
will take notice. Within the construction industry, one of the gross examples of this is the so-
called consultation that takes place long after the design is finalised. It is too late for managers
and employees actually to make a difference with their opinion. Even so, a launch event is
held and people are asked to fill out a questionnaire or make comments on a design that is
practically written in stone.
Appropriate involvement refers to some degree of participation that makes sense in the
light of the content of the decision and its actual relevance to the individuals or groups being
invited to participate. Research and practice have demonstrated repeatedly that the majority
of people prefer more involvement in decisions that affect them directly (Neumann, 1989).
One way of thinking about this is in terms of three concentric circles, with the individual and
his or her work at the centre (see Fig. 16.2). Design and construction issues, for example, that
are going to affect the individual and his or her work directly are those in which the individual
will most probably want to have a say. Theoretically, such decisions are profoundly
appropriate for that individual’s involvement.
Secondarily, the individual feels concerned about the group or unit in which he or she
works. Generally speaking and of relevance to design and build, the more closely one works
with others, the more concerned an individual will be with the fate of those individuals. If
design options relocate a department or shift the relationship patterns between groups or
units that interact continuously, then their involvement to a significant degree on the
participation continuum would be seen as appropriate.
Lastly, individuals have some claim on appropriate involvement when their position in
the larger organisation is going to be affected by construction. ‘Position’ would normally
refer to issues of occupational identity or status level. Design options can and often do have
implications for the ‘relatedness’ (Miller, 1990) of groups to each other. Relatedness means the
268 Neumann
Figure 16.2 Concentric circles of preferred involvement in content issues
fantasies and projections that groups have about each other in a complex social system;
those perceptions, feelings and opinions that are not necessarily based on face-to-face
interaction but have to do with symbols and stories. Issues like size of offices, differentials
in furniture, special meeting rooms and the like often speak to the symbols of relatedness. In
the light of how seriously such matters can affect morale, appropriate involvement in the
larger picture of the organisation needs to be kept in mind.
Genuine and appropriate involvement of managers and other employees tends to raise
important interconnections between construction decisions and other organisational concerns.
The sort of issues indicated certainly will relate to the larger organisation as a social system:
through involvement, the emerging meanings that managers and employees are placing or
might be inclined to place on certain design options become apparent. But more concretely,
there may well be implications for job and organisational design in terms of flow of
communication and tasks. These may have knock-on effects in terms of training and
development for implicated groups. Previous research has identified five substantial
interconnections in most comprehensive change projects (Neumann et al., 1995) – which
most construction projects can be considered to be.
Points of involvement in design and construction

processes
The principle of genuine, appropriate and interconnected involvement can be applied to

design and build processes. A generic model of the main stages through which a building
goes from design to build to use to eventual demolition offers a basic framework onto
which can be added the involvement of users. Such a model can be used to help identify
points of involvement that might be beneficial or necessary from a construction perspective.
At The Tavistock Institute, consulting social scientists have been working with
construction companies and academics to improve cooperation across, and to reduce
adversity in, the construction supply chain. Known as the ‘building down barriers’ approach
to supply chain management, one of the tools that has emerged through this action research
is a model of the construction process (see Fig. 16.3). This approach, also called ‘prime
contracting’, replaces short-term, single-project adversarial supply chain relationships
with long-term, multiple-project relationships based on trust and cooperation.
The advantage to this discussion of managerial and employee involvement is strong.
Based on supply chain relationships, the model incorporates accepted flows of construction
work with points of needs assessment related to clients. A new model is not necessary;
greater involvement of clients along the principle of genuine, appropriate and
Figure 16.3 Points of potential involvement in design and construction processes

270 Neumann
interconnected involvement can be hypothesised based on notions already developed by the

industry.
Five phases have been agreed as common across all construction projects: initiation and
feasibility; concept design; detailed design and construction; hand-over and maintenance;
and demolition (Holti and Nicolini, 1998). Initiation and feasibility is the phase of inception
of a new construction project: the client’s needs are established; an internal client-led team is
set up; a strategic brief of business requirements is produced; a prime contractor selected;
and an outline programme and fee for the overall project through the concept design phase
agreed. The second phase, concept design, explores the client’s functional requirements in
more detail resulting in a project brief: the supply chain will be involved at this point,
developing and appraising solutions to problems with an eye on life-costs, risk management
and value analysis. A project brief and firm price, signed off by all parties, constitutes the
terms of reference for action.
The third phase of detailed design and construction is completed with the involvement of
the supply chain to allow construction to happen in the most efficient, cost-effective and
risk-neutral manner. At the completion of this phase, the building is handed over to the client
for use and maintenance (Holti and Nicolini, 1998). Post-hand-over may involve the prime
contractor in monitoring the operation of the building through its life-cycle, to the point of
demolition – the final phase.
I have been experimenting in my consultancy practice with the idea that significant points
for potential user involvement come at the beginning and end of each of the phases of the
design and construction processes. At the beginning of each phase, those managers and
employees directly affected by the design and construction need to be given opportunities to
be involved (degree B) or to take decisions directly (degree A). During or towards the end of
a phase, those who are less affected need to be informed of what is or will be taking place
(degree D), or even consulted about proposals and plans (degree C).
As the first two phases are likely to be iterative, clarity as to who is involved when and
about what issues is important. In practice, experimenting with this model has meant the
establishment of a small steering team made up of those internal clients who will be directly
working on the design and construction processes (e.g. facilities managers, information
technology engineers, heads of departments directly and powerfully affected, change agents).
This team works throughout the design and construction processes to interface with the
prime contractor as well as the clients’ other contractors and suppliers as are implicated in
the change. This approach normally means that the client has a prime contractor who
handles much of the construction management process.
In addition to interfacing with the prime contractor, the small steering team ensures that
appropriate, genuine and interconnected involvement takes place. This means that executives
need only be brought in as appropriate; similarly, managers and employees directly affected
can be involved as appropriate. The team also ensures that broader consultation and
information is made available to themselves, their bosses and their prime contractor as
evaluation of actions and decisions from one stage and as input into the next stage.
Summary
Workplace productivity problems can be caused by design and build processes that
inadequately involve users. The chemical plant without windows, the colour coordinated
and open-plan scheme for the patents solicitors, and the ‘great building’ with numerous
petty problems are some examples. Perceptions of the multiple actors that are necessary to
designing, constructing and using buildings can hinder suitable involvement. Both
organisational and social factors stand as crucial in willingness and ability to include the
actual users in design processes.
The principle of genuine, appropriate and interconnected involvement of user groups can
help to craft an involvement strategy. Mapped onto a model of cooperation across the
supply chain network, users may be involved at the beginning and end of each phase of
design and construction. An infrastructure within the client system, typically using some
sort of steering committee, has proved facilitative for prime contractors and clients alike.
Such involvement can help the construction industry to make a positive contribution to
workplace productivity.
References
Holti, R. and Nicolini, D. (1998) Building down Barriers: a case report on an initiative in
progress. London: The Tavistock Institute.
Holti, R. and Standing, H. (1997) Psychodynamics and Inter-occupational Relations in an
Industrial sector – the Case of UK construction. London: The Tavistock Institute.
Miller, E.J. (1990) Experiential learning in groups, in The Social Engagement of Social Science,
A Tavistock Anthology, Volume 1: The Socio-Psychological Perspective (eds E. Trist and H.
Murray), 165–198. London: Free Association Books.
Neumann, J.E. (1989) Why people don’t participate in organisational change, in Research in
Organisational Change and Development, vol. 3 (eds W.A. Pasmore and R.W. Woodman).
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. pp. 181–212.
Neumann, J.E., Holti, R. and Standing, H. (1995) Change Everything at Once! The Tavistock
Institute’s Guide to Developing Teamwork in Manufacturing. Didcot: Management Books
2000.
Chapter 17
The Intelligent Workplace:

a research laboratory
Volker Hartkopf and Marshall Hemphill
The Center for Building Performance and Diagnostics (CBPD) is located within the School
of Architecture at Carnegie Mellon University. It was founded by Volker Hartkopf and
Vivian Loftness after their experience researching the causes of high levels of occupant
discomfort being experienced in Canadian government buildings.
The CBPD emphasises the need for a design team with all the appropriate disciplines in
place and functioning at the onset of a building design project. The design team makes trade-
offs affecting total building performance with the full knowledge and input of all team
members.
Total building performance
Total building performance (Hartkopf et al., 1986) is measured by four metrics: user
satisfaction; organisational flexibility; technological adaptability; and environmental and
energy effectiveness.
For user satisfaction (the human performer), six elements under the control of the design
team are identified: the thermal, acoustical and visual environments; spatial quality; air
quality; and building integrity. The requirements of each of these elements must consider the
positive or negative effects on the other five.
The human performer has physiological, psychological and sociological needs, while the
organisation has economic needs – all of which interact with the six elements of user satisfaction.
Table 17.1 is a matrix suggesting issues where each of the elements and needs intersect.
As the concepts expressed in Table 17.1 were taking shape, it became clear that a platform
was needed that provided both further input from users, designers and suppliers, and a stage
from which to articulate the message. Towards this end, the Advanced Building Systems
Integration Consortium (ABSIC) was established at the CBPD in 1988.
Table 17.1 Organising performance criteria for evaluating the integration of systems
Physiological needs Psychological needs Sociological needs Economic needs
Performance criteria specific to certain human senses, in the integrated system

1. Spatial Ergonomic comfort, Habitability, beauty, calm, Way-finding, functional Space conservation
handicap access, functional excitement, view adjacencies
servicing
2. Thermal No numbness, frostbite; Healthy plants, sense of Flexibility to dress with Energy conservation
no drowsiness, heat stroke warmth, individual control the custom
3. Air quality Air purity; no lung Healthy plants, not closed No irritation from Energy conservation
problems, no rashes, in, stuffy; no synthetics neighbours, smoke, smells
cancers
4. Acoustical No hearing damage, music Quiet, soothing; activity, Privacy, communication
enjoyment, speech clarity excitement, ‘alive’
5. Visual No glare, good task Orientation, cheerfulness, Status of window, daylit Energy conservation
illumination, way-finding, calm, intimate, spacious, office, ‘sense of territory’
no fatigue alive Energy conservation
6. Building integrity Fire safety; structure Durability, sense of Status/appearance, quality Material/labour conservation
strength + stability; stability, image of construction,
weathertightness, no ‘craftsmanship’
outgassing
Performance criteria general to all human senses, in the integrated system
Physical comfort, health, Psychological comfort, Privacy, security, Material, time, energy,
safety, functional mental health, community, image/status investment
psychological safety,
aesthetics
274 Hartkopf and Hemphill
ABSIC
Initially ABSIC membership was drawn from the private sector and comprised
design professionals, construction firms, users and component and service
suppliers. ABSIC’s mission and its early research findings brought it to the
attention of the National Science Foundation (NSF), which awarded it the
designation of an ‘Industry University Cooperative Research Consortium’, the
only one of fifty such research consortia at that time to address the needs of the
construction industry.
ABSIC was soon joined by four Federal agencies, each acting on its own and
for its own needs and missions: Department of Energy, Department of Defense,
Environmental Protection Agency and the General Services Agency (the world’s
largest owner and leaser of building space). The support and input from these
Federal partners has greatly strengthened ABSIC, not only since they are large
users of office space, with large employee pools, but also because of the great
depth of their talents in the very technologies necessary to optimise total building
performance. Table 17.2 lists ABSIC members past and present.
As part of its research into issues of building performance and building system
integration, ABSIC undertook an in-depth study of a number of leading buildings
around the world. The CBPD staff, supplemented by experts in mechanical
systems, telecommunications, power and signal distribution and self-assessment
surveys, comprised a team that would visit and simultaneously assess each
building. The resulting assessment represented a multidimensional evaluation,
devoid of the bias which results when the view of only one discipline is reported.
Things done well and those not done well were 0identified and catalogued. Buildings in
Table 17.2 ABSIC members
Current members and partners Current federal sponsors

• AMP Incorporated • National Science Foundation
• Bank of America • US Department of Energy
• CADSpec Multimedia • US Department of Defense
• Consolidated Edison • US Environmental Protection Agency
• Interface, Inc. • US General Services Administration
• Johnson Controls
• LG – Honeywell Past members
• LTG – Lufttechnische GmbH • Armstrong World Industries
• Siemens Energy and Automation • Bechtel
• Steelcase • Bell of Pennsylvania
• United Technologies/Carrier • Duquesne Light
• Zumtobel Staff Licht • Miles
• Josef Gartner and Company • PPG
• Mahle GmbH
The Intelligent Workplace 275
Japan, Germany, France, the UK, Canada and the USA were studied over a span of three
years. The critical findings were folded into a number of papers and keynote addresses
delivered by the CBPD staff. A book – Designing the Office of the Future – published in 1993
details the assessment methodology and the Japan building studies, and summarises finding
from the other countries (Harkopf et al., 1993).
As the essential characteristics and issues surrounding the ‘Office of the Future’ came
into focus, the need for a test bed to evaluate and demonstrate new technologies and new
design concepts became clear within ABSIC.
Exogenous developments
During this decade of ABSIC’s existence, substantial changes were occurring in the outside
world. The economic spheres within which organisations function were ‘globalising’.
Organisational structures were modified (down-sizing, outsourcing, etc.) to respond to the
macroeconomic upheaval – all with unprecedented speed. The scope of organisational activities
has greatly increased and the importance of the individual human performer – the knowledge
worker – has eclipsed that of the bureaucratic organisations of earlier times.
The advent of the new tools of work lies at the centre of the new economic and organisational
order. Computers, electronic databanks, video conferencing, portable offices, 24 hour
commerce, and many other technologies well known to us all are redefining work, on an
almost daily basis.
During this same decade, concerns for the finite environment and resources provided to
us have risen to positions of significance in governmental agendas. Sustainable architecture
has become a focus for the design team.
The appropriate structure to house and support the new organisational forms will be an
intelligent building. Intelligent buildings will provide unique and changing assemblies of
recent technologies in appropriate physical, environmental and organisational settings to
enhance worker effectiveness, communication and overall comfort and satisfaction. They
will ensure user health and comfort; organisational flexibility; technological adaptability;
energy effectiveness; and environmental sustainability (Hartkopf and Loftness, 1996).
The Intelligent Workplace: a ‘lived-in’ laboratory
Responding to the need both to demonstrate and to research the implementation of the new
building requirements, ABSIC and the CBPD have just completed construction of the
Intelligent Workplace (IW). The IW is sited on the rooftop of an existing classroom building
of the School of Architecture, Carnegie Mellon University (Fig. 17.1) and will be occupied
by the CBPD staff and advanced degree students. It will be a knowledge factory – a
Figure 17.1 The Intelligent Workplace, on the rooftop of the Margaret Morrison Building at
Carnegie Mellon
surrogate for most of today’s emerging organisational forms, both public and private.
We call it a ‘lived-in’ laboratory, to distinguish it from the more traditional isolated
research structure.
The IW will incorporated advanced technologies from around the world, combining
them with traditional building assemblies. The building design allows for change-outs
of almost all components, including the building skin and mechanical systems. Within
the building, sub-assemblies can be compared side by side. Advanced computer
technology is being designed to control the building subsystems in anticipation of
changing external and internal conditions, instead of in reaction to them (lead, not
follow). Additionally, site-specific opportunities are provided by the rooftop location,
allowing for technologies such as roof-located daylighting, photovoltaics, and roof
ridge ventilation to be explored (Fig. 17.2).
Major innovations
Dynamic layered facade
The facade construction includes light redirection panels to redirect daylight into the
interior while minimising glare at the perimeter. These panels will be motorised and
controlled in response to both the predicted solar position and the actual conditions,
as monitored by an on-site weather station. The panels are spaced away from the
Figure 17.2 Longitudinal section through the Intelligent Workplace
skin, allowing for both a walkway around the perimeter and operable windows.
The windows are occupant-activated for natural ventilation, which in turn will
save on energy to condition the interior over considerable periods of the year. The
windows are double-glazed and have surface coatings to reduce infrared
transmittance, while allowing 70 per cent visible light transmittance. The benefit
of daylighting for both energy conservation and occupant well-being has been
well documented by CBPD research.
On the room side of the windows, mullions are water cooled or heated, to
modify the radiant environment and enhance the thermal comfort of occupants
located near the windows.
Bolted modular construction
The steel structural components were carefully detailed by computer modelling

using bolted connections, both to minimise waste and to assure constructability.
As a result, erection of the steel was completed in four days and with no job site
waste. By transferring all sizing and detailing to the factory site, the detrimental
environmental impact of cutting and fitting at the job site was essentially
eliminated. Steel waste was transferred to the factory and was recycled instead of
being hauled from the job to a tip site as land fill. Additionally, the bolted structural
components can be disassembled and moved to another site, further enhancing the
sustainable nature of this architecture.
Open web floor structure
Using an open web floor support structure instead of solid beams allowed
integration of services and structure. The top surface is an access (pedestal) floor,
supported off the joists (Fig. 17.2). Electrical and signal/data wiring is routed in
defined paths by cable trays. Connection nodes are located 6 m on centre, providing
plug-in, plug-out connectability within 3 m for all task locations. Similarly, air
supply and return ductwork is routed through the joists. The net effect is a
reduced depth of this space and reductions in building volume and materials usage,
both steps towards a more sustainable architecture.
Floor-based support systems
All workstations are supported from floor-based systems. Conditioned air is supplied
through either floor-located discharge grilles or nozzles located on the workstation work
surface. This approach, more typical in Europe, is relatively novel in the USA. Choice of
velocity and direction of conditioned air is left to the occupant in all cases, and for the
workstation-located system, the occupant has the further option of controlling air temperature.
Power and telecommunication links are through plug-ins within the floor boxes and these
are, in turn, easily relocated through ‘plug-in, plug-out’ hardware. Task lighting, used to
supplement the daylight and/or the low-level ambient fluorescent lighting, is furniture-
located and user-controlled (in both intensity and direction). In some workstations the
occupant is given a low-powered masking sound system (beyond that provided by the air
supply nozzles). This system allows the worker to adjust the level of background noise to
mask nearby conversations and thus enhance concentration by reducing distraction. Furniture
and workstations (Fig. 17.3) are intended to be user-movable. Relocation of workspace
furniture to support changing work patterns, such as team projects, is within the users’
capabilities, especially because of the ‘plug and play’ telecommunication subsystems.
Figure 17.3 Floor plan of the Intelligent Workplace

Intelligent controls with learning systems
Carnegie Mellon has a formidable computer technology strength. This group has been
involved with the IW, developing computer software to control building systems in support
of both user needs and energy conservation. Rather than controlling in reaction to existing
conditions, and thus incurring inefficiency due to building lag, these systems will use predictive
algorithms to anticipate change. Working from both known solar positions and historical
weather data, supplemented by the on-site weather station, as well as gradually acquired
knowledge of individual workers’ habits and preferences, the software will anticipate building
condition needs. The setting of elements of the dynamic skin, the mechanical system and the
lighting system will be integrated by the software in anticipation of user needs. Minimum
energy usage will be one of the software’s goals, but user override is provided.
Significance of the IW
Using the research capability of the IW, the ABSIC/CBPD agenda will directly address the
compelling physiological and social needs of the over 50 million office workers in the US.
With certain modifications, the results may be extrapolated to other cultures. This agenda
stresses the importance of the environmental quality of the built space to the user. Recent
publication of studies on government workers in the UK links low levels of the individual’s
perception of control of the work environment to higher levels of heart disease (Wall Street
Journal, 1997). While, in that study, environmental control refers primarily to management-
controlled elements, providing the worker with a high level of control over his or her own
immediate thermal, acoustic, visual and air quality environments responds, we believe, to the
concerns noted in the study.
ABSIC/CBPD will also address the balance of the spatial, thermal, acoustics, visual and
air quality elements to the long-term goals of building integrity, energy conservation, and life
cycle value.
Anticipated outcomes
In the process of defining the range of user preferences for the various built environments, it
is expected that these preference ranges will exceed the values enshrined in building codes
and design practices. For example, ASHRAE standards limit local air velocities to 0.25 m s-
1
. It is obvious that user-controlled systems routinely operate at higher velocities. Similarly,
IESNA standards seek to limit brightness ratios in officing spaces to 4:1 or 8:1. Again,
daylighted spaces greatly exceed these values, yet are widely preferred by occupants. In
fact, proximity to windows has been shown by ABSIC research to be positively related to
user comfort and health (Loftness et al., 1995). Thus, IW research will likely suggest new
values for these metrics, as long as they can be user-controlled.
IW research will also challenge the relationship of higher first cost to owning cost by:
establishing new building design criteria, documenting increased productivity of the structure
itself; reducing energy costs; and raising the level of worker effectiveness (Napoli, 1998).
References
Hartkopf, V. and V. Loftness (1996) ‘Global relevance of total building performance. CIB-
ASTM-ISO-RILEM 3rd International Symposium: Applications of the Performance Concept
in Building, organised by National Building Research Institute, Tel-Aviv, December.
Hartkopf, V., V. Loftness, P. Drake, F. Dubin, P. Mill and G. Ziga (1993) Designing the Office of
the Future: The Japanese Approach to Tomorrow’s Workplace. New York: Wiley.
Hartkopf, V., V. Loftness and P. Mill (1986) The concept of total building performance and
building diagnostics. ASTM Special Technical Publication, Building Performance: Function,
Preservation, and Rehabilitation, STP 901, May, 5–22.
Loftness, V., V. Hartkopf, A. Mahdavi, S. Lee, J. Shankavaram and K.J. Tu (1995) The
Relationship of environmental quality in buildings to productivity, energy effectiveness,
comfort, and health – how much proof do we need? International Facility Management
Association (IFMA) World Workplace Conference, Miami Beach, FL, 17–20 September.
Napoli, L. (1998) Where every worker is ruler of the thermostat. New York Times, 15 February.
Wall Street Journal (1997) Lack of control over job is seen as heart risk, 25 July.
Chapter 18
Air-conditioning systems of the

KI Building, Tokyo
Hidetoshi Takenoya
The KI Building in Tokyo, Japan, provides a comfortable, productive environment for

occupants while also meeting the requirements of an intelligent building. Many new
technologies were successfully implemented to meet these goals.
This chapter describes these technologies and summarises the results of the systems
employed in the building. It begins with the planning process and concludes with a physical
and psychological survey of the occupants regarding the completed building and its systems.
At the centre of the KI Building is a garden atrium that opens to corridors on the floors
above (see Fig. 18.1). The atrium was constructed on a comparatively small scale, with a
floor area of 600 m2 and a height of 15 m. This space is designed to be relaxing and comfortable
for occupants.
Natural light filters through the atrium’s skylight down to the tropical plants surrounding
the ponds. This produces a satisfying environment for workers, particularly those with
work areas facing the atrium. However, the atrium and work areas required original, innovative
systems designed to provide indoor comfort.
Special systems
Besides systems that control the thermal environment, the KI Building features other special
systems. These systems enhance the building’s amenities by considering the effects of sight,
smell and sound on the human occupants.
Thermal environment
One of the features of the atrium is that there is no glazing and the office space is open to the
atrium. Due to a variable and large direct solar gain, and also because of large temperature
stratification between the top and bottom of the atrium in summer, some difficulties were
envisaged as to whether the thermal environment in the office area would be satisfactory.
Due to these concerns, two ideas were introduced.
282 Takenoya
Figure 18.1 Atrium at the KI Building
The first idea is the extract fan system to remove hot air at the top of the atrium in
summer. This fan will be operated automatically by thermostat. The second idea is an
air curtain along the office perimeter facing the atrium. This air curtain is provided by
low-profile floor-mounted fan coil units (FCUs) and is expected to block hot air into
the office. It was anticipated that supplying high-temperature air would result in a
major stratification in winter, therefore supply temperature limit control is introduced
to minimise stratification, and ceiling-mounted FCUs discharging air downwards are
installed around the atrium for heating.
Computer fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis was carried out to assess the atrium
environment. Figure 18.2 shows traces of markers in the atrium; Fig. 18.3 shows the
Air-conditioning in the KI Building 283
Figure 18.2 Traces of markers in the atrium
air distribution flow to the atrium. Fig. 18.2 shows marker tracing only within a cross-
section having a narrow width. The starting points of markers are randomly arranged
in the cross-section. The marker which has overshot space is rearranged nearest to the
overshooting location. By this method, it is possible to express the secondary flows
which occur near the main in relation to airstream.
Site measurement was carried out after practical completion and the result is shown
in Fig. 18.4. Occupancy zone temperature in the atrium is relatively low and varied
between 24°C and 26°C (setting temperature in cooling mode is 25°C). The stratification
in cooling mode is shown in Fig. 18.5 and temperature at fifth floor level is higher than
occupancy level by only 1 to 2 K, while maximum temperature at the top of the atrium
is 40°C.
The measurements match the results of a survey of worker satisfaction with the
atrium environment quite well. Fig. 18.6 shows the survey results for a typical summer
day. Satisfaction with the thermal environment was high, although some occupants
284 Takenoya
Figure 18.3 Air distribution flow in the atrium
Figure 18.4 Thermal environment in the atrium

Figure 18.5 Stratification in the atrium: summer
claimed to be ‘a bit hot’ when the floor of the atrium had a direct solar gain at around 13:00.
Fragrance environment
Essential oils have a long history in Oriental healing traditions and are popular today in
aromatherapy. A recent study shows that ‘bathing in woods’, meaning walking through a
wood with relaxed feelings, improves freshness. Through recent measurements of work
efficiency (such as measuring a test group’s brain waves, particularly expectation waves),
some human physicaland psychological responses to fragrances have been documented
286 Takenoya
Figure 18.6 Post-occupancy evaluation for thermal environment of the atrium: summer
(Sugano, 1987).
On the other hand, the latest intelligent buildings are fully equipped with office automation
equipment, e.g. personal computers, in order to adapt to information technology or borderless
business circumstances, and are planned to improve intellectual productivity and creativity
of workers. Hence office occupants working in such intelligent buildings are forced to deal
with a large amount of information exactly and speedily. This sort of mental tension in the
office could result in a physical and psychological strain, so-called techno-stress (Shuei-
sha, 1991; Industrial Survey Committee, 1987).
This phenomenon indicates that office automation originally intending improvement of
the working environment for workers could result in impaired physical and mental health.
Intelligent buildings in a real sense have to provide a comfortable workplace in terms of not
only physical but also mental aspects, by overcoming harmful effects.
Based on these studies, a fragrance control system was introduced in the KI Building. Its
purpose was to create a comfortable environment and combat techno-stress (see Fig. 18.7).
The fragrance system consists of an air-handling unit (AHU) for the atrium, a fragrance
generator containing three fragrance essences, and a direct digital control unit, with which the
air-handling unit controls the dispersal of the fragrances.
The fragrance control scenario (see Fig. 18.8) was based on the human reaction to each
aroma and the living pattern of the building occupants. Fluctuation control was introduced to
counter the sense of smell becoming dull. Operating status of the fragrance environment
system, e.g. status of dispersal, kind of fragrance, and accumulated dispersal volume is
monitored by the building management system in real-time mode.
CFD analysis was carried out in order to optimise the volume, pattern and time of
fragrance dispersal into the atrium. Figure 18.9 shows the simulated fragrance density
distribution in the atrium, and it was expected that the density of fragrance in the occupied
zone would reach the specified density in ten minutes of dispersal. The trend graphs showing
the fragrance density of supply air from the AHU and return air to the AHU are shown in
Figs 18.10 and 18.11.
Post-occupancy evaluation was carried out to prove the effect of the fragrance control
system. Figure 18.12 shows occupants’ responses. Through careful experimentation, a
comfort ratio increase of 24 per cent (simple mean value) was achieved by implementing the
Figure 18.7 Atrium fragrance control system

288 Takenoya
Figure 18.8 Atrium fragrance control scenario
Figure 18.9 Predicted fragrance density distribution in the atrium
fragrance environment.
Airflow fluctuation control
The pleasurable feelings associated with congeniality and positive attitudes (such as when a
person is experiencing a calm breeze at the seashore) can be observed in the heartbeat rate.
When spectral analysis with the frequency of f is applied to the intensity of heartbeat
fluctuations, the distribution to 1/f can be obtained. This is so-called 1/f fluctuation. This
theory was duplicated and introduced in the atrium’s air-conditioning system on a trial basis
(Ichinose, 1992).
By loading the software of 1/f fluctuation into the building management system, the
Figure 18.10 Fragrance density of supply air from AHU
Figure 18.11 Fragrance density of return air to AHU
speed of the inverter (variable voltage and variable frequency) in the atrium’s air
handler is controlled. The control cycle was set for approximately 10 minutes and
spectral analysis of air velocity measurement results shows the distribution of 1/f (see
Fig. 18.13). 1/f fluctuation control was applied for only cooling, and it was set to
operate only when the supply air temperature was equal to or less than 24°C (set
temperature in summer is 26°C).
290 Takenoya
Figure 18.12 Post-occupancy evaluation for fragrance control
Figure 18.13 1/f distribution
A post occupancy evaluation was carried out to prove the effect of airflow fluctuation
control. A total of 77 people replied, and we can conclude that a certain level of satisfaction
has been achieved. The details are as follows:
• more than half of the occupants that replied felt air fluctuations, but some of them may
not have recognised it had they not been asked
• most of the occupants who did recognise the airflow fluctuations considered it preferable
and comfortable; some would have preferred it to be stronger

• most of the occupants who were not comfortable felt cold due to the air flow
• male occupants generally recognised the air fluctuations rather than the female
occupants; this tendency depended on the location and clothing
• airflow made the occupants feel colder, and sunlight made the occupants
hotter; this tendency was dependent on clothing
• most of the occupants who claimed they were not comfortable were those
who felt less air flow and more sunlight.
Biomusic
Another innovative amenity of the KI Building was the creation of a musical

environment. Music was composed for the building based on analysis of the
human brain wave response to sound waves. The so-called biomusic was introduced
specifically to upgrade office comfort.
The musical programme alternated between achieving stimulated and relaxed
mental states. In a relaxed state, a waves of 8 to 12 Hz are dominant; in a stimulated
state, ß waves of 14 to 20 Hz are dominant (Nuki, 1990). The different types of
biomusic were properly combined for the programme. Fig. 18.14 shows the
percentage variance of a and ß waves with time when test subjects listened to
stimulating music and relaxing music.
The music in the atrium area has had favourable results. Accordingly, a music
Figure 18.14 Percentage variance of a and ß waves

292 Takenoya
programme is being planned for work spaces separated from the atrium, to comply with the
needs of the occupants in these areas.
Diversifying workspaces
The environmental advantages of intelligent buildings are often degraded by changes in office
layout or applications after practical completion of the building. These changes are typically
deemed necessary to meet changing demands on corporate resources.
However, these changes can have adverse effects on the indoor environment. Specifically,
cooling loads from new office equipment can increase, and these loads can be unevenly
distributed.
To prepare for such situations in the KI Building, technologies were introduced to upgrade
flexibility and reliability and save energy. The VAV diffuser was one such technology. This
new product has three functions: temperature control, temperature detection and air flow
rate control. The air flow rate can be controlled for each 3.6 m grid.
As the room temperature begins to rise due to the increasing cooling load, the power
element containing wax in the VAV diffuser expands to open the damper, providing a higher
air flow rate (see Fig. 18.15). When the room temperature drops, the power element contracts,
reducing the airflow rate until the room temperature reaches the set point. According to the
test in the mock-up room, it was proved that room air was induced toward the temperature
sensor, which detects approximately the room temperature. At the start of heating operations
in winter, the diffuser spring of shape-memory alloy fully opens the damper when the
supply air temperature is equal to or more than 28°C. This aids in reducing warming-up
time. This self-regulating control VAV diffuser works without the building management
system, therefore installation costs as well as running energy costs are lower.
Figure 18.15 Cross-section of the VAV air diffuser

Figure 18.16 Occupant satisfaction with the indoor environment
Sound masking
In an open office area, occupants sometimes complain about noise from the conversation of
others, especially telephone conversation. In the KI Building, there is no glazing between the
adjacent office space and the atrium, therefore it was expected occupants would suffer from
the atrium noise. A sound masking system was introduced for the open office area facing the
atrium to combat this noise. According to the questionnaire responses, it had favourable
results.
Occupant satisfaction
The creation of a comfortable environment by using several new technologies has been
appreciated by KI Building occupants. Figure 18.16 depicts the satisfaction of occupants
with their working environment.
Specifically, comfort dissatisfaction decreased to 7.17 per cent. This is approximately
294 Takenoya
one-fifth of what it was before workers moved into the KI Building. The satisfaction level
increased seven-fold.
References
Ichinose, H. (1992) Air Conditioning of 1/f Fluctuation. National technical report. Matsushita
Electric Co., Tokyo 38(1), Feb.
Industrial Survey Committee (1987) Ergonomics and Building Management/Office Dictionary.
Tokyo.
Nuki, Y. (1990) Bio-Music for Amenity Formation. Bio-Musics Seminar, Tokyo, Japan
Management Association, Feb.
Shuei-sha (1991) Mental Distortion by Stress/Atlas of the Human Body. Tokyo.
Sugano, H. (1987) Psychophysiological research of odors. Fragrance J., no. 86.
Chapter 19
Employee productivity and the

intelligent workplace
Walter M. Kroner
This chapter presents the results of two consecutive research studies related to individual
control of the microenvironment and human performance. First, it briefly describes the
results of a year-long study of the emerging developments related to individually controlled
environmental systems (environmentally responsive workstations, ERWs1) and their
associated technologies. Second, it presents the results of a year-long field study related to
ERWs and worker productivity conducted at an insurance company in the northern Mid-
west of the United States. The study revealed a statistically significant positive association
between the change in productivity and the change in ‘overall satisfaction’ with the workspace
(Kroner et al., 1992). Researchers found that improved indoor architectural and environmental
design contributed to an overall increase in productivity of 16 per cent. ERWs were estimated
to increase the level of worker productivity by approximately 3 per cent.
Towards an ERW research agenda: state-of-the-art

study background
Three distinct events between 1985 and 1989 predated this study:
1. 1985 – the Architectural Research Center Consortium Workshop on the Impact of the
Work Environment on Productivity (Dolden and Ward, 1985)
2. 1988 – the International Symposium on Advanced Comfort Systems for the Work
Environment (Kroner, 1988)
3. 1989 – the Office Productivity and Workstation Environment Control Research Planning
Workshop (W.I. Whiddon and Associates and Ostgren Associates, 1989).
Two clear research challenges resulted from these three workshops: (1) the ERW concept
should be researched and developed, and (2) research related to ERWs’ impact on worker
productivity was essential.
296 Kroner
All three groups emphasised that in the context of continual change, whether those
changes are in the building design decision-making process, in the occupant’s organisational
and managerial processes, or related to the shift towards employing ever-increasing numbers
of knowledge workers, expectations are constantly shifting. With such a dynamic work-
environment it is difficult to predict needed or desired levels of performance for almost any
of the building system and environmental quality categories. As a result, the ERW concept
should be explored and developed along with the concept of heterogeneous environmental
systems. Such systems include combinations of ERWs, conventional HVAC systems, and
other environmental strategies.
In 1990, in direct response to the above research challenges, the authors undertook a
state-of-the-art study of ERWs and related technologies in an effort to: (1) pull together
information relating to divergent and isolated ERW developments; (2) review critically the
technical dimensions of ERW-related developments by industry and their experience; and,
(3) identify the key issues and questions which should inform the continued development of
this potentially significant research area (Stark-Martin and Kroner, 1991).
The study concluded that ERWs are an emerging technology and represent a new and
innovative way of potentially improving worker comfort and productivity and energy
efficiency in buildings, and providing new demand-side management strategies to building
owners. There is strong evidence to suggest that, if ERWs are integrated with a building’s
thermal inertia, night-flush cooling potential and similar strategies, energy costs in office-
type buildings can be reduced by as much as 40–50 per cent (Von Thiel, 1987).
The impact of ERWs on productivity and

satisfaction: an insurance company’s office
environment
The study was initiated in 1990 in direct response to the research needs identified above.
The study’s research objectives were to analyse the impact of ERWs on office worker
productivity and worker response to individualised environmental conditioning. The study
consisted of three distinct surveys: (1) a productivity analysis of individual workers; (2) a
comfort and satisfaction survey; and (3) an examination of worker absentee patterns.
The study had several unique strengths. It used an established company-generated
productivity monitoring system; combined objective productivity data with multiple
subjective assessments of worker satisfaction and comfort; included measurements of three
distinct influences on productivity (a major organisational relocation, a new built environment
and a new environmental conditioning technology); and included randomised experimental
intervention to assure the internal validity of assessments of causal effects.
Productivity and the intelligent workplace 297
The insurance company and ERWs
The insurance company occupied its ‘old’ office building from 1960 through 1991. Expansions
to the original structure in 1972 and 1982 resulted in a final gross floor area of 61,800 square
feet. The old building had conventional lighting, HVAC, and ventilation systems similar to
most office buildings today. In July 1991, the company moved into a newly designed office
building, within the same city, encompassing 149,800 square feet of gross floor area. This
new building was designed to incorporate 370 ERWs, making it the largest ERW office
installation in the world.
The particular ERW involved in this study provides the workstation occupant with
individualised control of: the temperature, velocity and direction of air delivered to the
desktop through two air diffuser towers; a radiant heat panel located below the desk top; a
desk-mounted task light; and a sound-masking device. Each ERW has its own replaceable air
filters. An occupancy sensor shuts down the unit if the workstation is not occupied for over
ten minutes and returns it to the set levels of operation when the occupant returns.
Methodology
The study began on 1 January 1991. For 27 weeks researchers observed conditions and
collected productivity data in the old building. In July 1991, the company employees moved
to the new office building, providing the study team with 24 weeks for productivity data
collection and observations there. The move to the new building created problems of
disentangling the separate impact of the new building and the ERWs, however. The research
team’s response to this challenge was deliberately to introduce variation in the ‘application’
of ERWs. This meant that, while we continued to receive information from the insurance
company on each worker’s productivity, we randomly disabled their ERWs during the last
24 weeks of the study. We selectively ‘disabled’ the ERW units by disconnecting three
features: air temperature and velocity control and the radiant heat panel. All other features
were left intact.
The productivity analysis
The productivity analysis focused on 118 workers in the Underwriting Departments. The
measure of productivity was the number of files each worker processed during a given week.
The productivity assessment method used was company-generated, had been in place for
over two years prior to the analysis, and was known to and accepted by the Company’s
employees. Subjects were not informed that an analysis of their productivity was being
conducted by the research team. They were told that two surveys were under way; one
which examined their reactions to their work environment through a questionnaire, and the
298 Kroner
second an energy study which required the random disabling of some ERWs for a period of
time. Since the company’s productivity measurements were ongoing and were not specifically
noted by the employees, the effect, productivity, was not affected by the subjects’ knowledge
of being under study.
The Tenant Questionnaire Survey Assessment Method
To measure worker comfort and satisfaction, the study team utilised the Tenant Questionnaire
Survey Assessment Method (TQSAM) (Dillon and Vischer, 1987). It is based on occupant
surveys using a standardised questionnaire. The TQSAM provides a quick and efficient
method for assessing office buildings from the user’s point of view. The results of the survey
are used to generate a profile of the tested building, which can then be compared to a
normative profile and/or a previously occupied building’s ratings. The decision to use the
TQSAM was based on the following: (1) it was a readily available ‘tool’; (2) its use allowed
the study team to compare the company’s office building with other office buildings in the
TQSAM database. The study team realises that there may be some inherent problems with
the TQSAM due to the statistical techniques used in its development. However, because the
emphasis of this project was on the productivity study, the TQSAM survey form was
adequate for our use.
The TQSAM was administered to the company’s employees on three separate occasions:
in March, while the company was still in its old building; in July, soon after the company
moved into its new building; and in November, after occupants had a chance to acclimatise to
the new building.
Study results
The productivity study
We studied changes in productivity associated with three different causes. Table 19.1 shows
the results of the significance tests. Figure 19.1 presents a schematic view of the changes in
productivity over the course of the study. The greatest effect was the drop in productivity
caused by the disruption of the move between the old and new buildings. The second, and
perhaps most significant, effect was the improvement in productivity that resulted from the
move to the new building with its innovative environmental and architectural design concepts.
The third most notable effect was the increase in productivity associated with the new ERW
technology.
The most subtle effect was the drop in productivity associated with temporarily disabling
the ERWs. The size of this effect was attenuated by non-compliance with the experimental
protocol: workers frequently insisted that the disabled ERWs be reconnected. When we
Table 19.1 Estimated median changes in productivity by cause (95 per cent confidence
interval for median percentage change)
Cause of change Low Mid High

Disabling the ERWs
unadjusted -18.3% -11.8% -1.7%
adjusted -22.9% -12.8% -2.7%
New building with ERWs 4.4% 15.7% 28.4%
Move between buildings -39.7% -31.7% -21.4%
Figure 19.1 Changes in productivity over the course of the study
plotted a worker’s average percentage change in productivity against the average fraction of
full ERW function during the experimental weeks, we found a weak (R2 = 4 per cent) but
statistically significant (p = .04) positive association. Therefore, we extrapolated to full
compliance with the experimental protocol and used the regression intercept as an adjusted
estimate of the experimental impact. After this adjustment, the drop in productivity associated
with disabling the ERWs was even more significant. Furthermore, the fact that there was a
correlation between the extent of ERW disabling and the extent of the drop reinforces the
case that it was indeed the experimental manipulation that caused the change in productivity.
In round numbers, we can summarise Table 19.1 as follows. The move between buildings
temporarily reduced productivity by about 32 per cent. In the longer run, the combination of
new building and ERWs increased productivity by about 16 per cent over the baseline in the
300 Kroner
old building. Disabling an ERW for one week reduced productivity by about 13 per cent
relative to the new baseline in the new building.
These figures apply to the median worker, so half the workers had larger changes and half
had smaller. We note that the figures, while quite certain as to sign, are rather uncertain as to
magnitude. Thus, the productivity drop associated with the move could actually be anywhere
in the range from 21.4 per cent to 39.7 per cent, with 31.7 per cent as the most likely
estimate. The increase associated with the combination of new building plus ERWs could be
anywhere in the range from 4.4 per cent to 28.4 per cent, with 15.7 per cent most likely.
Likewise, the decrease associated with disabling the ERWs could be anywhere from 2.7 per
cent to 22.9 per cent, with 12.8 per cent most likely. These uncertainties are rather large but
accurately reflect the extent of variability within and across workers and the relatively small
numbers of person-weeks in the dataset.
Finally, it appears that disabling the ERWs resulted in something like a 2 per cent overall
drop in productivity. We arrived at this figure by multiplying the median 12.8 per cent drop
in productivity when the ERWs were disabled by the median 15.7 per cent increase in
productivity achieved in the new building [(+ 15.7% change from new building + ERWs) ×
(- 12.8% change from disabling ERWs) ˜ - 3 per cent impact on productivity associated with
ERWs alone] (Fig. 19.2) Given the uncertainties in the components, the actual figure could
easily fall anywhere between a fraction of 1 per cent and 7 per cent, with 2 per cent a
reasonable point estimate.
Stepping back from the details, we believe these findings are a major step in the study of
the link between work environment and productivity. We have solid statistical evidence
Figure 19.2 Total increase in productivity in the new building with ERWs
have solid statistical evidence that objectively computed measures of productivity increased
for underwriting personnel in the new, ERW-equipped building. Because of our experimental
manipulations, we have solid statistical evidence that the ERWs played a significant part in
the increase, because temporarily disabling the ERWs caused statistically significant decreases.
Finally, to give some scale to these changes, we showed that the combined positive effect of
the new building and ERWs was about half the size of the transient negative effect caused by
the move between buildings.
As previously mentioned, the 16 per cent increase in productivity associated with the
move to the new building is perhaps the most significant finding of the study. For the first
time we have a quantitative measure of the significance of a high-quality indoor environment
that has been architecturally and environmentally designed to facilitate work-flow management
and maximise occupant comfort and satisfaction. The fact that this study was carried out in
a real office building, as opposed to a laboratory, and used an established employer-generated
productivity measure is equally significant.
While the results of the productivity study provide useful and interesting productivity
data as mentioned above, they also raise several additional questions. For example, though
we know that productivity dropped when the ERWs were disabled, we cannot be certain
whether this effect was caused solely by a reduction in comfort, by the loss of individual
control associated with the disabled ERW, or because individuals were frustrated due to
being inconvenienced. Additional questions remain as to whether the results would have
been similar had we disconnected the task-lighting and/ or some other ERW function. Further
study in these areas is indicated.
Conclusions
A number of factors contribute to making this study a unique contribution to the field. The
impact of quality architectural design has often been debated, but never quantified. The
quantifying of productivity as it relates to architectural design and/or a particular environmental
technology satisfies a long-standing need for a basis for decision-making related to building
design, innovation in environmental technology and energy, and other considerations.
Through an almost uncanny series of coincidences, we were able to take advantage of a
rare opportunity that involved the largest installation of environmentally responsive
workstations (ERWs) in the world, in a company that had a tested productivity measure in
place, and at a time when the company was moving from a conventional office building to a
modern and innovative architectural design. We were handed, in other words, a clear-cut
before-and-after scenario. Up to now, a significant amount of analysis has been performed
on the impact of environmental quality on productivity. This work, however, has either been
performed in laboratories or in field studies that attempted to measure the impact of isolated
302 Kroner
environmental factors on productivity using measures meaningful to scientists, but not to

managers in the workplace. The study was designed to focus on knowledge workers and
provide information pertinent to management as well as the research community.
Out of our good fortune came a series of findings, of which the most significant are the
following.
• We can claim with certainty that individual control over one’s environment yields a 2
per cent improvement in productivity. The actual improvement in productivity
produced by the ERWs is undoubtedly greater, but given the relatively short time span
(two weeks) in which we were able to disable the ERWs and study the results, this is
what we can claim conservatively. However, the Senior Vice President of the Insurance
Company, states that ‘By our results, productivity went up from 4 to 6 per cent, and
with a payroll of over $10 million a year, that’s a substantial return on investment’.
• In the TQSAM study of the individual workers, the tremendous transformation of the
workers’ response to the perceived quality of their environment is equally significant.
• In a holistic sense, these findings allow us to quantify the impact of a well-designed,
high-quality environment on productivity.
What our findings do not tell us is what particular aspect of environmental quality is most
important to an individual worker. We do not know, for instance, the relative importance of
the individual’s control of air velocity versus air temperature. We do not know whether a
direct flow of air is preferable to an indirect flow of air. And we do not know the circumstances
under which a worker would be willing to trade a movable radiant heat panel below the desk
for one at a different location or with a different configuration.
However, it is important to be able to establish quantitatively and without doubt that the
ability of an individual to control his or her own work environment in response to personal
needs makes an appreciable difference. In fact, we have anecdotal evidence that individual
control is such a powerful factor that workers have refused offers of higher-paying jobs
elsewhere once they realised that the new position would not include individual environmental
controls.
As is invariably the case, arriving at answers to pressing questions has uncovered a whole
new set of concerns, for example:
• the availability of individual controls appears to contribute to lower energy consumption

– but the extent of the reduction needs to be quantified
• the availability of these controls leads to a significant drop in worker complaints – but
that, too, needs to be quantified
s
• economic impacts result from worker satisfaction and retention – employers have
fewer people to replace and train – but these impacts remain to be measured.
Clearly, the study justifies additional studies of this type. We feel that it is well worth
investing R&D funds to gain a better understanding of individually controlled environments
in both economic and environmental terms.
References
Dillon, R. and Vischer, J.C. (1987), Derivation of the Tenant Survey Assessment Method: Office
Building Occupant Survey Data Analysis. Public Works Canada.
Dolden, M.E. and Ward, R. (eds) (1985) Proc. ARCC Workshop on the Impact of the Work
Environment on Productivity, April, AIA, Washington, DC.
Kroner, W. (ed.) (1988) A new frontier: environments for innovation. Proc. International
Symposium on Advanced Comfort Systems for the Work Environment, May. Center for
Architectural Research, Rensselaer, Troy, NY.
Kroner, W.M., Stark-Martin, J.A. and Willemain, T. (1992) Using Advanced Office Technology
to Increase Productivity: The Impact of Environmentally Responsive Workstations (ERWs)
on Productivity and Worker Attitude. Troy, NY: Center for Architectural Research, Rensselaer.
Stark-Martin, J.A. and Kroner, W.M. (1991) Environmentally Responsive Workstations (ERWs):
Toward A Research Agenda. Troy, NY: Center for Architectural Research, Rensselaer.
Von Thiel, D. (1987) Vergleich verschiedener Heiz-und Luftungssysteme mit einer Klimaanlage.
Cologne: Schmidt-Reuter.
W.I. Whiddon and Associates and Ostgren Associates (1989) Proc. Office Productivity and
Workstation Environment Control Research Planning Workshop, Electric Power Research
Institute (EPRI). Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Note
Environmentally responsive workstations (ERWs) integrate and provide heating, cooling, lighting,
ventilation and other environmental qualities directly to the occupants of workstations. Additional
integrated components may include: communication and information systems, electric power
service, optical view panels, and fragrance options. The key feature of an ERW is that the
occupant controls, modulates, and maintains the environmental conditions. ERWs are designed
to operate when the workstation is occupied. ERWs are at their best if they are integrated with
an environmentally responsive architecture.
Chapter 20
Future design – guidelines and

tools
John Doggart
Designing buildings is a complex task, requiring many judgements and priorities to be made.
Costs, spatial layout, services and aesthetic issues are just four of the factors which the
design team must reconcile, and the good designer is the one who achieves the right balance.
One priority is starting to stand out above all others: to produce a high-performance
building that outperforms its competitors by contributing to better occupant health and
well-being. By raising the importance of these factors, productivity gains can be made which
overwhelm most other considerations. For example, a 1 per cent gain in productivity is
typically worth more than saving the entire fuel bill, while a 5–10 per cent loss in productivity
can wipe out a company’s profit and send it to the wall.
So how can the designer contribute to increased productivity? Until recently information
has been scanty and uncertain, but there is a growing body of knowledge that allows design
performance to be predicted with some confidence. Even when benefits cannot as yet be
quantified, and there are many areas where this is true, the evidence shows that one direction
is better than another, i.e. which factors are beneficial and which are to be avoided.
Productivity is affected by a huge range of design factors:
• comfort temperatures
• cooling systems
• thermal mass
• window design
• day and night light
• controls
• finishes
• building sickness
• built form.
All of these are under the control of the designer. So what should the design team aim for, and
what tools and guidelines are available? These notes aim to provide some guidance, while
Future design – guidelines and tools 305
recognising that these are early days and much more remains to be investigated before a full
and stable picture emerges.
Comfort temperatures
In the 1930s the idea took hold that people were like machines, requiring certain average
operating conditions to function satisfactorily. For the designer this manifested itself in
simple guidelines, for example that temperatures should be 21°C in winter and 22°C ± 1 K
in summer. Clearly this assumes that all people want the same temperature, all the time. This
oversimple view of human needs is being supplanted by more subtle understanding of
people and their needs.
One of the most interesting challenges to the mechanistic view is: why do most people in
the UK prefer naturally ventilated buildings, when these plainly don’t meet the standard
comfort criteria? This was shown in a survey for agents Richard Ellis, where 89 per cent of
the sample said that they preferred buildings without air conditioning (Harris Research
Centre, 1994). Another survey indicated that this was only true if severe overheating was
avoided in summer.
These results require that comfort definitions are revisited. It now appears that occupants
accept, and perhaps even like, variations of temperature over time, provided that they
remain within overall limits. In particular occupants seem content to accept higher
temperatures for short periods of time: the higher the temperature the shorter the time.
These times and temperatures vary between different sources, but a coherent view emerges
when these sources are aggregated (Table 20.1).
The values in Table 20.1 provide a coherent time–temperature profile which can be
specified by the client and used by the design team to test their design. This is carried out
using a detailed energy and temperature analysis program such as TAS, ESP, or APACHE.
Predicted performance is then compared with the time–temperature profile. Because of program
Table 20.1 Acceptable temperatures and time periods
Temperature Maximum time for temperature Source

to be exceeded
21°C 100% All

25°C 5% Cohen (1993)
27°C 2.5% CIBSE (1986)
28°C 1% Cohen (1993)
28°C <30 degree hours Cohen (1993)
29°C 0% Petherbridge et al. (1988)
306 Doggart
uncertainties, we like to use a safety factor of two, i.e. that predicted temperatures never
exceed half those allowable by the time–temperature criteria.
By using this technique, severe summer overheating is avoided. At last a client can get a
building that will perform well and is likely to be preferred by occupants, without summer
overheating which would erode productivity gains.
Comfort cooling
In virtually all offices, some degree of comfort cooling will be required at some time of the
year. This can be provided by conventional air-conditioning, but this route is now being
severely questioned. Air-conditioning is an expensive user of fuel, with consequent effects
on increasing greenhouse gas emissions. Fuel costs can be £8/m2 per year more than natural
ventilation, and extra maintenance costs can increase the cost difference to £13/m2 per year.
Air-conditioning is also frequently cited as a cause of sick building syndrome, and a paper at
the 1997 European Respiratory Society Conference reported that people working in air-
conditioned offices are almost two and a half times more likely to suffer from respiratory
infections than those in naturally ventilated buildings. These conditions accounted for 17 per
cent of days off work among staff in air-conditioned offices, compared with 9 per cent in
other buildings (Teculescu, 1997). Coupled with the preferences previously stated for
naturally ventilated buildings, there now must be a serious question mark on the continued
use of air-conditioning, except where necessary. Certainly air-conditioning is no longer a safe
haven for designers and occupants, but must be judged alongside alternatives which often
appear less risky and more healthy.
Obtaining reliable cooling from natural sources requires a different approach to design,
using many elements of the building in combination to obtain the desired effect. The techniques
vary according to climate. In northern temperate climates the most common method is to
design with more heavy materials to make the building into a giant thermal store, which
absorbs temperature rises during the day. At night the building is cooled down by cool air,
leaving it ready for the next day. In Mediterranean countries this strategy is reinforced by
more active techniques such as pre-cooling the air through pipes embedded in the ground. In
hot countries air movement can be used to provide comfort conditions (ECD Energy and
Environment, 1998). Detailed modelling and air flow analysis is needed to predict performance
with confidence.
Window design and daylight
Windows are vital to the comfort and well-being of the occupants, but their benefits have
been neglected for many years. On apparently reasonable economic grounds, floor plates
have been getting deeper and windows often cannot be opened. Yet this goes completely
against occupants’ desires. When Longman’s new head office was being designed, the staff
were asked what features they would prefer. Unprompted, 80 per cent said that they wanted
an openable window, far higher than any other wish (Standley, 1994).
In another example when the Open University was upgrading its premises, a trial was
made with retrofitting air-conditioning on one floor, as an alternative to improved windows
and thermal mass to another. In a subsequent survey occupants overall said they preferred
the naturally ventilated floor (BRECSU, 1997). To produce this result, designers needed to
design the windows carefully to avoid draughts, make sure that blinds did not clash with
opening windows, and that the manual controls were easy to use and immediately
understandable. Programs such as N-Light and Daylight provide the designer with the means
of predicting adequate daylight (ECD Energy and Environment, 1997, 1999).
The growing importance of windows has resulted in Dutch Health Codes requiring that
no one should sit more than 6 m away from a window for any extended period. This requires
buildings to be narrow plan, typically 12 m wide.
Nightlight
In the absence of daylight, tasks still need to be well lit. Six per cent productivity increases
have been reported by the Rocky Mountain Institute at a Post Office at Reno, and 15 per
cent gains at Lockheed (Romm and Browning, 1994). The tools for achieving this improvement
are well known, taught to engineers, and easy to apply – there really is no excuse for poor
design.
The quality of light is also very important. The BRE has shown that high-frequency
lighting cuts headaches and eyestrain by 50 per cent in offices (Wilkins et al., 1989), worth
about 0.5 per cent in productivity improvements through reduced absenteeism. High-
frequency lighting should therefore be fitted as standard.
Controls
Personal control is greatly prized by occupants. There can be problems between occupants
when they need to share controls; to avoid problems the number sharing them should be kept
to seven or less. Controls which switch on lights automatically are disliked intensely; the
general rule is to switch on manually, and have absence detection to switch off when people
leave their room or space. Controls should result in fast reaction response, either directly by
occupants operating their own controls or through a facilities manager, the latter requiring
excellent organisation if delays, dissatisfaction, and consequent productivity losses are to be
avoided.
308 Doggart
Finishes
Allergic reactions to office materials are becoming increasingly common, due to a cocktail of
problems. Two main issues stand out. The first problem is off-gassing from materials and
finishes. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) result from many materials, such as solvent
glues used to fix down carpets, solvents used in paint, and formaldehyde used in chipboard
and many manmade fibre boards. Some of these have short-term effects, but others can last
for months and even years. Careful specification and preference for natural materials can
avoid the problem at source. The likelihood of off-gassing of suspect materials can be
checked using a method developed at SBI, the Danish Building Institute (BRECSU, 1997).
Dustmites are the second major problem. As buildings have become sealed up and
temperatures have risen, conditions for dustmites have improved. To combat the problem,
materials such as carpets, soft materials and open shelves which act as breeding grounds,
should be avoided.
Building sickness
Sick building syndrome is not yet understood, but its effect on absenteeism is undoubted.
Figure 20.1 shows that the reduction of one building sickness score reduces absenteeism by
around five days per person per year, or about 2.5 per cent (Jones et al., 1995). Avoidance
is more difficult, but guidance is given in the Building Research Establishment Environmental
Assessment Method (BREEAM) for existing offices (BRE, 1993). This lists the main
features of a building that correlate to building sickness and their relative weighting. One
BREEAM credit is given for 30 points or more, two for 45 points or more and a maximum
three credits for 60 points or more (Fig. 20.2).
Figure 20.1 Health and productivity in the office. Each diamond represents the data
from one building
Building form
The requirements listed in Table 20.2 suggest a particular building form for temperate
climates, with floor plates about 12 m wide, maximum of seven people sharing controls
(preferably individual control), 3 m high ceilings to aid natural ventilation, and cross-ventilation
designed in. Air-conditioning is not needed in most temperate climates, and this can be
extended to Mediterranean climates with enhanced natural cooling systems.
Table 20.2 Indicators of healthy buildings
Points Issue
Heating, ventilating and air-conditioning

5 no air-conditioning (except in computer suites, secure rooms and other special
high heat load situations) and building designed to avoid overheating
3 openable windows or mechanical ventilation with individual control
3 air intakes (a) designed to ensure exhaust air does not re-enter, (b) located
away from sources of outdoor pollution and (c) protected by suitable filters (one
point for each)
2 steam or no humidification*
3 no recirculation of used air*
1 recirculation with adequate particulate filtration
3 systems designed and installed for easy maintenance and cleanliness, with filter
media, thermal and acoustic insulation prevented from releasing fibres into the
airstream*
3 extract ventilation to areas used as toilets, kitchens, and for smoking,
photocopying and other polluting activities
2 occupants provided with local control of temperature, e.g. by thermostatic
radiator valves, and, where appropriate, information on the use of these controls
3 commissioning complete or system recommissioned in past five years, including
check procedure on the commissioning data*
3 all systems thoroughly cleaned before hand-over or at least within the past five
years*
2 no collection of stagnant water or dirt within ventilation system*
Building and furnishing materials

3 all furnishings thoroughly cleaned within the past year or shown to be clean
1 use of non-static carpets
Lighting and solar control

2 no tinted windows
2 solar control blinds (external or inter-pane) on all windows oriented more
southerly than NE or NW
2 lighting able to meet CIBSE standards with provision for visual display unit work
where necessary
2 use of high-frequency ballasts for fluorescent lighting
2 artificial lighting with local controls plus task lighting and with a view out of a
window from each workstation
310 Doggart
Table 20.2 Continued
Noise
2 for meeting the BREEAM indoor noise requirement
Layout
3 cellular rather than open plan, i.e. at least 90% of rooms designed for ten or
fewer occupants
3 shallow plan: maximum distance of occupants from a window of 7 m
Operation and maintenance issues
3 hygiene and maintenance schedule including: all air intakes checked and
cleaned regularly, filters replaced, wet regions in air-conditioning systems cleaned and
sterilised and regular checks for and cleaning of dirt accumulations in system*
3 operational maintenance schedule including: automatic control system (e.g. local
thermostats), humidification units
3 operational maintenance schedule including: control point settings, a
requirement for recommissioning on repartitioning and a check for blocked air
supply grilles*
3 carpet cleaning specification requiring high performance, regularly maintained
vacuum cleaners with high efficiency, hot water extraction (steam) cleaning
(with minimum operating temperatures of 70°C) or liquid nitrogen treatment at
least once a year and, where papers are stored for more than two years, cleaning
them
3 questionnaire-based staff survey to determine prevalence of sick building
syndrome symptoms one year after occupation and then every two years
3 policy to minimise the use of polluting processes, equipment and materials
including adhesives, floor waxes, stains, polishes, spray cans, deodorisers,
detergents, etc.
3 smoking ban or smoking allowed only in designated and separately ventilated
rooms which make up less than 5% of the floor space
2 lighting levels checked and light fittings cleaned on a regular basis
Note
* Automatic credit for natural ventilation.
The benefits of good design
The combination of techniques leads to an impressive array of benefits (Table 20.3). Well
designed buildings can dramatically improve the organisation’s bottom line. Savings of 3 per
cent to 15 per cent can be made, worth £600 to £3,000 per person per year at typical salary
of £20,000 including overheads. These savings are all bottom-line benefits, and can be made
by good design, with short payback times.
Evaluation
Assessment and evaluation of performance can be complex and time-consuming. To overcome

these difficulties, ECD has developed two programs, AssessA and PerformA, which simplify
evaluation. AssessA is for new office designs, while PerformA is used when buildings are
occupied.
Table 20.3 Benefits of good design
Issue Guidelines Benefits
• Comfort temperature 5% over 25°C 89% of people prefer natural

2.5% over 27°C ventilation, provided high
1% over 28°C summer overheating is
0% over 29°C avoided
• Comfort cooling Avoid mechanical cooling Staff preference, also

where possible reduced operating costs of
around £13/m2 per year
• Window design and Openable, maximum 6 m 80% of people want
daylight distance to window openable windows
• Nightlight Normal lighting guidelines, 6–15% work improvement

max 400 lux, avoid glare,
personal control
• Light quality High-frequency lights 0.5% absenteeism

improvement
• Controls Quick response, Reduced complaints,

understandable, personal increased staff satisfaction
control
• Finishes Avoid VOCs, fabrics and Reduced allergic reactions

carpets, dust collectors
• Building sickness Follow BREEAM 2.5% absenteeism
guidelines improvement
The programs report on what has been achieved so far. They then outline where further
improvements can be made, and provide an action plan for achievement.
PerformA has been developed to assess the likelihood of sick buildings and to report on
the financial benefits of avoidance. It also generates financial improvements through better
lighting, as well as reporting on health, legal and other financial benefits of high performance
buildings. PerformA has a module to allow whole buildings portfolios to be inventoried and
managed.
Conclusions
There has been a step increase in knowledge on how buildings can be designed to improve
productivity. Designers can now predict how to improve productivity, and offer their clients
a real improvement to their bottom-line performance. Tools such as PerformA and AssessA
exist so that current performance can be quickly assessed and areas for further achievement
s
312 Doggart
identified. The potential savings are vast – between £600 and £3,000 per person per year.
This allows designers to establish their position, to offer buildings which provide real
tangible benefits to their clients. A client in turn will demand not only a beautiful building but
also one that helps their company to be more productive than their competitor. Good
designers will be able to respond positively. Good design really is good for business.
References
Anglia Polytechnic University (1998) Daylight (Daylight Calculation Program) Chelmsford.

AssessA and PerformA evaluations programs, ECD Energy and Environment Ltd. Tel. +44 171
405 3121.
BRE (1993) BREEAM/Existing Offices Version 4/93. An Environmental Assessment Method For
Existing Office Designs. BRE Report BR 240, Building Research Establishment. Garston.
BRECSU (1995) Environmental Assessment of Buildings. THERMIE Programme Action No.
B108, Garston.
BRECSU (1997) Good Practice Case Study 308. Naturally Comfortable Offices – A Refurbishment
Project.
CIBSE (1986) CIBSE Guide, vol. A8. Chartered Institute of Building Services Engineers. London.
Cohen, R. (1993) A comforting future. Building Services, Sept., 35–36.
ECD Energy & Environment Ltd (1998) EC2000 Project. Rue Abbe Cuypers 3, Bruxelles 1040,
Belgium.
ECD Energy & Environment Ltd (1999) N-Light. Daylight Factor calculation program. 11–15
Emerald Street, London WC1N 3QL.
Harris Research Centre (1994) Occupiers’ Preferences. A survey for Richard Ellis by the Harris
Research Centre. Part 2 – The Performance of the Workplace. Available from Richard Ellis,
London, Tel. +44 171 256 6411.
Jones, P., Vaughan, N., Grajewski, T., Jenkins, H.G., O’Sullivan, P., Hillier, W., Young, A. and
Patel, A. (1995) New Guidelines for the Design of Healthy Office Environments. University
College Cardiff and University College London.
Petherbridge, P., Milbank, N. and Harrington Lynn, J. (1988) Environmental Design Manual –
Summer Conditions in Naturally-Ventilated Offices. Report BR 86, Building Research
Establishment, Garston.
Romm, J. and Browning, W.D. (1994) Greening the Building and the Bottom Line – Increasing
Productivity Through Energy Efficient Design. Snowmass, CO: Rocky Mountain Institute.
Standley, Marilyn of Longman addressing the Green Buildings Turning The Tide seminar held at
the Royal Society of Arts 27 October 1994. Details from ECD Energy & Environment,
London, Tel. +44 171 405 3121.
Teculescu, D. (1997) Respiratory and irritant symptoms in French office workers. European
Respiratory Society Conference, Berlin.
Wilkins, A.J, Nimmo-Smith, I., Slater, A.I. and Bedocs, L. (1989) Fluorescent lighting, headaches
and eyestrain. Lighting Res. Technol. 21(1) 11–18.
Chapter 21
Optimising the working

environment
John H. Jukes
Two of the great mysteries of the 1990s are as follows.
1. Why do 90 per cent of computer installations fail to meet their original productivity
performance specifications? (Recently published figures show IT investment in the
USA increasing by 700 per cent and labour productivity plummeting by 80 per cent.)
2. Why do over 80 per cent of staff in ordinary offices suffer from the classic list of sick
building syndrome symptoms? (Headaches, tiredness, dry/itchy eyes, sore/dry throat,
cough, cold/flu symptoms, irritability, skin rashes/itches, pains in the neck, shoulders
and back, etc.)
An involvement with the first problem, as we shall see, led to the second one. The solution
to both questions has evolved over several years of practical development in a number of
different organisations.
In 1988, after 25 years in office productivity measurement and improvement programmes,
we found an increasing demand to investigate new computer systems that were failing to
meet their performance standards.
For example, a new PC network system for a major financial services organisation was
planned for forty staff and was failing to cope with eighty staff. Checking the workload
measurement standards showed that forty staff should handle the work easily. Observing
key tasks in operation showed that staff were able to do them in the time planned. However,
at the end of the day their output was only some 50 per cent of what it should be. Attempts
to improve performance met with unusually emotional response, so they were not pursued.
Staff on non-computerised tasks using the same basis for setting time standards had no
problem in meeting the daily target. The observed situation was that sitting someone in front
of a PC all day resulted in their personal performance dropping by around 50 per cent
without them being aware of it. The problem was eventually resolved by making conventional
improvements in the system and organisation. Eventually forty staff were coping with the
workload. However, the new systems meant the planned staffing should be twenty. The
productivity gap remained. Management felt that enough was enough, and were happy to let
314 Jukes
productivity gap remained. Management felt that enough was enough, and were happy to let
sleeping dogs lie.
After several PC network projects with similar results, we decided to investigate this
mysterious productivity gap. The question was: why did the same staff working in the same
office seem to work at a much slower pace using a PC all day than they did doing non-PC
tasks?
The opportunity to find the answers came in the form of a project involving some 250
design engineers and support staff. The first twenty CAD systems were not performing to
target and could not justify any further investment in CAD. Here was a powerful incentive,
since all the younger engineers felt that CAD experience was necessary for their future as
engineers.
This time we made the conventional improvements and set targets including the mystery
gap. Within 6–8 weeks four staff reached them and the rest went sick – with a bewildering
array of different symptoms. Our medical advisers said it was stress: we were making them
work too hard.
We took the twenty off the CAD machines to train another group while we sorted out the
problem. The original twenty, once back on the drawing boards, recovered their normal
productivity levels and stopped going sick.
An article on sick building syndrome listed symptoms which coincided with our list of
symptoms experienced by staff. Further investigation showed that most staff experienced
them to some degree, but usually in a mild form that did not prevent them from coming to
work. They tended to go critical under external stress.
We reasoned that an anti-sick building syndrome pill would solve all our problems.
Further investigation revealed that, although there seemed to be general agreement on the
symptoms, there was less agreement on the causes, other than they were likely to be many
different ones.
We therefore decided to see if we could find our own solution, so we worked back from
the symptoms. The common major complaint was tired eyes. Experimenting with a variety
of VDU filters eventually produced one or two that had an effect in reducing eye symptoms
but had little effect on productivity. The type of filters that we used also seemed to give
protection from the various more controversial variety of non-ionising radiation that the
VDUs seemed to generate. This is everything from soft X-rays through ultraviolet, infrared,
microwaves, radio frequencies, very low frequencies, extra low frequencies and static.
We tried the NASA solution of one large specimen plant per person. This had no measurable
effect other than the experimental group asking for them to be taken away because other staff
kept offering them bananas and nuts.
From one eminent university professor we had our first workable clue. ‘People sitting in
front of a VDU all day tend to sit still; they sit badly; they become upper chest breathers;
they don’t get enough oxygen to the brain and they slow down; their immune system gets
Optimising the working environment 315
impaired; the slightest stress and they go sick.’

The next clue was from a well known consultant optician: ‘Staff are sitting gazing at
brightly coloured images at a fixed focal length. Their blink rate drops, their eyes dry out.
The eye muscles get tired from being locked in one position all the time. When they try to
look at a more distant object, the eye muscles won’t relax.’ Another source of advice suggested
that looking at a bright image at a fixed focal length for extended periods induced a light
hypnotic trance.
So the solution was – get them to sit right, blink, look away from time to time to change
their focal length and have regular breaks.
The problem of what was right sitting took us through the world of ergonomics,
orthopaedics, chiropractors, osteopaths, the Alexander System and A.C. Mandal. After
much conflicting advice and experiment we came to the conclusion that we had to be able to
adjust the height of the desk for the individual. We found a 15 inch differential in the sitting
height between our tallest and shortest staff member. A stress-free active sitting position
meant getting the chair and desk height right for the individual and supporting the pelvis
rather than the lumbar region. It also meant rethinking the shape and dimensions of the desk
to accommodate VDU, keyboard, etc. and leave enough room for paperwork.
With some Alexander tuition on correct sitting posture for the staff, most back, neck and
shoulder aches went, as did some headaches. Productivity started to improve noticeably. We
waited for the gap to close, but it didn’t – it only closed about 25 per cent.
Since everyone complained about the air-conditioning system we looked at that next.
There were enough data to show that productivity falls when it is too hot or too cold.
However, we finally gave up trying to find an air temperature that everyone agreed was
comfortable. We decided that there was some work to be done on high air velocities which
made a reasonable temperature feel too cool. We found air turbulence created by the hot air
rising from groups of computers reacting with the cool air coming in from ceiling slots. We
found people sensitive to radiant cold from windows. We decided that the ideal thing would
be to give everyone their own mini system to control air temperature and velocity, but at the
time we could not find one. We found that putting the air intake into the floor got rid of
turbulence and created a more even temperature with lower air velocities.
We found that the humidity was too low, at 15–20 per cent. The main building humidifiers
had been turned off due to a legionella scare some three years before. Some staff were
drinking thirteen cups of tea and coffee a day and were showing dehydration symptoms.
A small army of portable humidifiers and gallons and gallons of water later the humidity
was up to 50 per cent – and everyone hated it. It felt clammy and thundery and stuffy and
close and oppressive and headachy, etc.
This time another well known university came to the rescue. ‘It’s negative ions that you
need. Air-conditioning strips them out of the outside air and the computers’ static charge
soaks up the rest. Positively charged air feels stuffy and thundery.’
316 Jukes
It took some time to find ionisers that really did work and did not wipe your credit card
or computer disk, or plaster the place with black goo, or make people feel woozy (from too
much ozone). We found one type which combined ionisation with air filtration.
The ioniser filters soon filled with large amounts of black stuff. It was carbon – apparently
derived mainly from the skin cells. We all shed skin cells at the rate of several million a day.
Eighty per cent of household dust is skin cells but they are grey. The PC and associated
electrical equipment provide the electromagnetic fields which cold-cook the cells down to
carbon, oxygen and hydrogen.
Airborne carbon particulates, it seems, have some unpleasant characteristics in that they
become positively charged; they are brittle and break into finer and finer pieces; they get
down to below 0.1 of a micrometre (millionth of a metre); they go through the body’s
filtration defences; they get into the bloodstream and wreak havoc. This huge volume of tiny
particles comprising several million a cubic foot provides a vast absorbent surface area which
is home to volatile organic compounds, bacteria, viruses, fungi spores, etc. The body’s
immune system gets rid of them but gets tired and stressed in the process. One theory is that
70–80 per cent of SBS symptoms may be attributed to this one factor.
The air now seemed fresh and sharp. In fact the building manager accused the staff of
opening the windows. ‘You can tell when they have opened the windows, you know; the air
smells different.’ Staff seemed more cheerful and alert. Most of the respiratory problems and
eye problems seemed to vanish.
The output took a sharp upward swing and we waited for the gap to close this time. It did
not. It stuck at about two-thirds of the way. This was pretty good, but there was obviously
something else we had not found.
We noticed that despite all the complaints about screen reflections and glare, the output
from the staff near the windows was always higher than that of those in the centre of the
office. There was something about daylight, but what?
We seriously contemplated putting light wells through the upper floors, using optical
fibres or even mirrors. Someone then said that his uncle used some special lights to grow his
prize orchids which imitated natural daylight. They turned out to be daylight full-spectrum
lighting. The facilities manager nearly had a heart attack when he saw the price of the tubes.
We decided to invest in another pilot project.
Some staff did not like the new lights and complained of flicker. We found later that full-
spectrum lighting increases visual acuity, which made some staff aware of the flicker that
was always there. Fluorescent lighting is flashing on and off at 50 times a second: the brain
only processes at twenty to thirty times a second, so it seems like continuous light. An
electronic ballast puts the frequency up to 30,000 cycles, which is virtually continuous light.
We added electronic ballasts.
Some staff still did not like the light and found it too harsh. We then found a polarising
filter which got rid of reflected glare and covered the bare tube. Since daylight is polarised by
the atmosphere, we now had our goal of virtual daylight. Polarised light, it seems, is largely
absorbed by the objects it fall on.
In a day or so the hard core of headaches had vanished. We had now not only closed the
productivity gap but passed it, and symptoms were down by about 80 per cent.
We still had some skin trouble and one or two staff experiencing nausea. Although the
ionisers neutralised most of the static in the environment, we adopted a policy of earthing
everything we could to prevent any build-up on chairs, desks, floors and other surfaces.
We had a rash of respiratory symptoms which we found related to fungus spores breeding
in the carpets. We swopped the carpet tiles for ones that had received anti-fungal, anti-
bacterial, anti-microbial treatment.
By now we regularly monitored symptoms as well as productivity.
Staff now complained that the office was too noisy. We got in a sound engineer and
sound-absorbed everything in sight – ceiling, floor, walls and screen panels. Everyone then
said it was too quiet. We experimented with the wall and screen panels until (nearly)
everyone said that it was OK, but – they could now hear other people’s conversations more
clearly. Sound masking provided the answer to this by increasing the ambient noise level.
Rather to our surprise, the productivity curve took another sharp upward lift. We had not
expected any significant effect from sound suppression. It was some time later that we
realised the reasons. Apart from distracting conversations, the different wave form patterns,
particularly saw-tooth from continuous machine noise, can create muscle tension and stress.
Also, reflected sound creates confusion and stress in our sound-direction sensing mechanism.
We now realised that what we were doing was recreating the outdoors, indoors. In
hindsight this is, of course, the sort of environment that the human body has evolved to cope
with over the past 273,000 years, compared with the office environment which has only
existed for the past 100 years.
If the great outdoors is good for the body – what about plants again? We found that by
using a different mix of hydroponic plants researched for NASA, we could add to cooling and
humidity and get rid of volatile organic compounds, which are an unavoidable component of
all plastics. More importantly, they could add to the oxygen levels and reduce carbon
dioxide. The result was a marked reduction in respiratory symptoms and got total symptom
reduction to around 90 per cent.
What we also decided we were attempting to do was to get people to work in a poised,
relaxed, alert manner free of undue physical stress. In this way they could handle and recover
from external psychological stress which is the inevitable part of any job. Some staff were
now getting sick when they went home. We now seemed to have a well building syndrome
situation.
This raised the question of how far can we go with this. Can we create an environment
that does not just not make people tired and sick? Can we create an environment which
318 Jukes
positively supports the mind and body in achieving a maximum performance all the time?
Can we leave staff at the end of the day with energy in hand to enjoy their leisure? What
about geopathic stress, what about Feng Shui, what about the positive psychological effects
of colour and smell, what about even more user-friendly desks and chairs, what about
reclining chairs, what about the effect of aesthetics (can offices be beautiful instead of bland,
boring and messy?), what about flat screens, what about what people eat? Why not treat
staff like athletes who could be coached, groomed and supported by an environment that
could provide super performance? All this we are working on and testing now.
So what was the problem? The evidence indicates that a body working in an office with
other people is subjected to a number of ergonomic and environmental stressors for which
the body has not yet evolved an adequate adaptive mechanism. Electricity has only been
around for the past 100 years, and personal computers for the past ten years. All this is in
the context of 273,000 years of evolution. The PC itself is not the problem, it is just one
more additional source of stress. Air-conditioning is not itself the problem, since the problem
is observable in non-air-conditioned offices.
It seems that the body responds to the right light, air quality, working position and
neutralising the effects of electromagnetic radiation (EMR), static, sound, bacteria and fungi
spores. The observed effect is an automatic improvement of around 32 per cent in personal
productivity from sharper reaction times; a reduction in errors from better visual acuity and
a marked improvement in cheerfulness and morale.
Can an employer afford to provide such an environment? We suggest that the cost of not
investing in optimising the working environment is already being paid in the form of additional
staffing and occupancy costs. The improvement in personal productivity can be translated
into tangible staff savings in the order of 12–16 per cent. The cost of implementing the
improvement of the working environment is equivalent to around 4 per cent. This is a return
on investment of 3:1 to 4:1. Carefully phased, the project can be virtually self-funding, with
an additional profit contribution of around £2,500 per employee.
All this depends on being able to measure productivity. Contrary to popular belief, there
are many well-tried productivity measurement systems. Alexander Proudfoot’s short interval
scheduling system has been in use for forty years and has been applied successfully to
almost every human activity in thousands of organisations.
So the solution to the two mysteries is that working with a PC in an ordinary office
subjects the body to a complex cocktail of ergonomic and environmental stressors. The
body, adapting to outside stress, uses energy in the adaptation process. The body slows
down to conserve energy. As more energy is consumed the body gets tired and reaction times
increase. Eye fatigue results in impairment of visual acuity. As the adaptive process falters,
so other parts of the body malfunction and manifest what are called sick building syndrome
symptoms.
An optimum workplace environment reduces external stress. Normal response times

return, productivity is automatically enhanced, visual acuity is recovered and enhanced.
Environmental health symptoms just disappear. The working environment becomes a pleasure
to be in and enables staff to cope with the inevitable psychological stress that work and life
bring to all of us. Now stress can be dissipated by well-spent leisure and a good night’s sleep
without slowly accumulating.
There are some 100 million people working with computers around the world that are
costing their employers some £250 billion in lost productivity, and some 60 million staff are
suffering physical discomfort unnecessarily. Here we have a workable affordable solution
that is applicable to everyone. The computer and the office are with us. Let us learn to live
with them for the benefits they bring and avoid the ‘disbenefits’. These are some of the
answers to the problem; there are bound to be others. Sick building syndrome need be no
longer a mysterious complex complaint but something that can be solved logically and
systematically.
Part 6
The future
Chapter 22
New ways of working: a vision of

the future
Francis Duffy
A legacy of resentment
Why doesn’t the office – where all the clever people we need to run an information economy
are housed – get the management attention it deserves? Perhaps it is because many managers
have inherited the idea that the office is a minor appendage to real production, something that
has to be put up with if not bitterly resented. If so, they are wrong. Often today the office
is the business, certainly offices have become much more central to business performance.
Business can now use office space aggressively and imaginatively as a major factor of
production as well as a powerful way of expressing values.
What has changed? Information technology has now become so powerful and reliable that
all office processes are being completely rethought. As office technology develops
exponentially, new kinds of office culture are being invented on the run – plural, fluid,
responsive, knowledge-based – that are in complete contrast to conventional forms of office
work. The old, top-down, hierarchical structures are dissolving. Conventional boundaries
are disappearing. New processes are being invented. Clerical work is being automated or
exported to economies where labour is cheaper. The chronology and the geography of newer
kinds of office work are being redrawn as IT allows more and more people to control, and
indeed redesign, the ways in which they manage their energy and intelligence, shape their
working days and reconfigure the connections between home, work and leisure.
In this period of rapid transition conventional office locations, buildings and interiors are
by no means neutral. They can be disastrous. Managers, particularly in old countries like
Britain and France, but also in North America, where the Taylorist legacy in office architecture
is physically still so strong, should worry about them as potentially formidable obstacles to
business change. The outmoded fabric of the office has been shaped by decades of managerial
neglect as well as by the supply-side bias of developers, architects, engineers and furniture
salesmen. What has suited the property, construction and furniture industries turns out to be
324 Duffy
the unwitting preservation, in concrete and glass instead of aspic, of the top-down, divide-
and-rule, mechanistic values of Taylorism. Frederick Taylor’s Scientific Management was, of
course, the predominant managerial style of the early decades of this century, when the
conventional form of the office crystallised.
The catalytic function of design in a time of change
Today many clients want to understand how to make office buildings relate more closely to
organisational performance.
For decades in office design, architects have voluntarily taken a back seat. This was
certainly not the case at the turn of the century, when architects such as Sullivan and Wright
were hammering out the norms that determined the shape of what became the conventional
twentieth century office building. Subsequently architects stopped innovating in office
design quite simply because they no longer had to do so. Everyone knew what an office was
like – a successful formula had been worked out relating buildings and interiors to a particular,
and very limited, notion of tenant and user demand. For a long time the norms and conventions
of office design remained as stable as the simple technology of the typewriter and the
straightforward habits and behaviour of clerical organisations.
Scott Adams’ cartoons, featuring the hapless Dilbert in his hopeless labyrinth of endless
carrels, capture the worst side of modern enterprise. Nothing can be achieved. Everyone and
every thing is blocked. Millions of Americans laugh daily at these caricatures – the conventional
office is easy to mock and the jokes may make the horror and the waste tolerable for a
moment – but the symbolic connection between the futility of the organisation and the
banality of its environment is not funny. Buildings can kill. They can kill easily enough
through poisonous air-conditioning and lethal materials. But, much more lethally at this
particular point in the development of organisational ideas, office buildings can kill through
their amazingly accurate capacity to express and even exaggerate whatever is wrong, backward
and inhuman about organisations. This is because the iconography of the conventional office
is deeply rooted in the old-fashioned, mechanistic values of Taylorism. These values are
exactly what advanced managers today are struggling to escape from. It is ironic that the
architects’ habit of treating office space as a supply-side commodity has dulled management
as well as themselves to the significance of the design of the working environment.
This is the negative side. A contemporary organisation that wishes to change its culture –
to abandon hierarchy, to encourage interaction, to stimulate creativity, to accelerate innovation,
to break across previously impenetrable organisational silos – would be foolish to attempt
such changes while persisting with an office environment that expresses, through inertia,
exactly the opposite values. Such messages, communicated all too eloquently by the old
New ways of working 325
office environment, fundamentally and fatally contradict the objectives of any contemporary
change management programme.
The positive side of the same argument is this. Managers who genuinely wish to change
their organisation’s culture have an immensely powerful tool available to them in the re-
design of their office environment. The values that are essential to the development of new
ways of doing business – egalitarianism, transparency, stimulus, creativity, lateral thinking,
accelerated responsiveness – all have very concrete equivalents in the powerful language of
design. The task for both managers and architects today is to unlock the eloquence of
innovative design to reinforce business performance by expressing business ideas for business
purposes.
Innovation in office design and using office design to improve business performance are
closely related – as the next three examples illustrate.
A supply-side innovator
‘Good design is good business’ is one of the favourite sayings of the most brilliant of all
contemporary British property developers, Stuart Lipton. Lipton made his name by creating
in the early 1980s the most innovative business park in Europe – Stockley Park, near
Heathrow. He was at the same time the genius behind the Broadgate office complex in the
City of London, a huge inner city development for the financial services sector which has had
roughly the same impact on the fabric of the City of London as the Rockefeller Center had
on midtown Manhattan fifty years earlier. Commercial property developers have not usually
been noted in the UK for fine discrimination in the commissioning of architectural talent.
Lipton is an exception – not only through using such excellent and well established practices
as Arup Associates, Richard Rogers, Sir Norman Foster and SOM, but in giving such
relatively unknown but equally talented architects as Eric Parry and Nicholas Hare their first
chances to build major communal buildings.
What is so remarkable about Stuart Lipton as a developer is that he is totally convinced
that design really does matter to business. Rapid construction, excellent facilities management,
rational office floor plates that tenants can quickly plan and re-plan, intelligent environmental
services that can cope with changing technologies and new patterns of use, the provision of
such amenities between buildings as the fine new urban squares at Broadgate and the elegant,
park-like landscaping at Stockley – these are all examples of Lipton’s imaginative use of
physical resources to anticipate and satisfy emerging user needs. Only by challenging the
best architects with the toughest briefs based on the most thorough user research can the
developer escape from the stereotypes that have been the curse of the real estate industry for
decades. At both Stockley Park and Broadgate sectoral requirements of different types of
326 Duffy
office user have been carefully studied. Market and user research has at last reached the
world of property development. Lipton is a developer whose commercial success comes from
testing intuition against empirical reality. He then uses design invention to provide office
organisations with the physical infrastructure that gives them the capacity, in all their varied
ways, to do their work as efficiently and effectively as possible.
Two demand-side innovators
Robert Ayling, the Chief Executive of British Airways, is an equally interesting innovator in
the creative use of design, this time from the demand rather than the supply side of the great
equation that links people and buildings. Ayling and his Project Director, Chris Byron, have
led the creation of a new headquarters near Heathrow – designed inside and out by the
Norwegian architect, Niels Torp – which is explicitly and purposefully intended to change
the culture of the airline. BA was still a nationalised industry a decade and a half ago when the
threat – and the opportunity – of sophisticated international competition galvanised it into
becoming the success it is today. The first improvements in attitude and service were
achieved naturally enough on the tense frontline where the airline connects with its customers
at the service counters and in the aircraft. The inertia that was holding the airline back from
even more commercial progress was all too physically apparent in the endless brown and
beige corridors in the ramshackle collection of buildings that previous decades of a bureaucratic
and quasi-military regime had bequeathed as headquarters accommodation to BA.
Today everything has changed. The brown and the beige have gone. The long corridors are
no more. Fragmentation is over. Waterside, BA’s new headquarters building, is one of the
most advanced examples in the world of how to use architecture in a programmatic and
carefully managed way to achieve business goals. Waterside is a low building, consisting of
six four storied, open plan, office pavilions, each a substantial building in its own right,
connected by what would have been called, in the nineteenth century, an arcade – a continuous
architectural device that is far more like a street than an atrium. This cobbled street undulates
up and down and from end to end of the complex. It is glass roofed, crossed by bridges that
link the pavilions to each other, and is immensely rich and varied in the amenities that it
offers – shops, restaurants, conference and meeting rooms, sunny cafés as well as centres for
information for office staff and centrally located, highly visible training areas for flight crews.
Two thousand eight hundred people work permanently at Waterside, practically all at
fixed workstations. Hundreds more BA staff and others flood in every day – from flight crew
to consultants. The street is as lively and interactive as Covent Garden. Given the elaborate
infrastructure of information technology that has been installed, including cordless phones,
there is no doubt that the capacity of the building could be pushed even higher. The barriers
have come down, not because openness looks nicer but because BA, as a modern service
organisation, has decided that it must use the building to reinforce transparency as an agent
of cultural change. Ayling knows that communication, teamworking and fluidity are necessary
for survival, let alone success. Consequently the building is deliberately designed to broadcast
the critical importance of togetherness, of interaction, and of accessibility and transparency.
Ayling also knows that British Airways has no choice today but to provide the kinds of
environment that attract and retain not old-fashioned, time-serving clerks but the brightest,
the best, the most ambitious and the most discriminating people in the job market.
All these policies are deliberately built into Waterside. The building is programmed to
achieve management goals at two levels – directly, by design features that work efficiently,
and indirectly, by using architecture as a highly effective way of expressing values and ideals
that could not be transmitted more powerfully or more consistently in any other way.
Stuart Lipton and Robert Ayling are excellent but by no means unique examples of the
kind of thinking businessmen who are rapidly bringing the UK economy up to date – not
least by design. The third example of innovative use of design for business purposes is
American. This is John Lewis, formerly CFO of Andersen Worldwide, the Chicago
headquarters of the two recently separated components – Andersen Consulting and Arthur
Andersen – the twin epitomes of successful, rapidly growing, knowledge-based organisations.
John Lewis’s contribution, from 1995 to 1996, was to use Andersen Worldwide’s move
within downtown Chicago of some 1200 staff to revolutionise the culture of the Andersen
headquarters. The opportunity, which he took hold of so vigorously, was to use the move to
promote interaction between all levels and parts of Andersen Worldwide and, at the same
time, to simplify and delayer what had been a very hierarchical organisation. SOM, and
particularly Neil Frankel, were responsible for the interior design. Identical ‘home base’
workstations have been provided for practically everyone, whatever their seniority. Trappings
of status have been swept away. The proportion of space dedicated to common facilities –
particularly project and meeting spaces as well as quiet rooms for concentrated individual
work – has been substantially increased. Bands of common facilities alternate with home
bases so that none of the predominantly open plan, individual workplaces is further than a
few feet away from a substantial array of supplementary shared accommodation. Cordless
telephony, as at BA, allows people to plan their use of space and time in a much more fluid
and intelligent way than in the conventional office. The impossible conundrum of the
conventional office, i.e. to create individual workplaces that are equally good at accommodating
both interaction and concentrated work in the same spot, is solved by zoning. Mobile
workers have access to whatever environment is appropriate for the task at hand.
Three features of John Lewis’s leadership of the Andersen Worldwide project deserve
328 Duffy
special attention. The first is the economic basis of the project. Because of the radical
rationalisation described above, 1,600 people have now been accommodated in two-thirds of
the rentable area previously occupied. What this means to Andersen financially is that what
is an elaborate fit-out, substantial by any standards, has paid for itself in rather less than four
years, so significant has been the reduction in the total annual rent. The second key feature
is the enormous care taken in this project to establish a business case for each design
innovation – as thorough and as well based on data as for any other key business decision.
The third feature has been the involvement of large numbers of staff in the programming and
design process, not just through data collection – important as that is – but through feedback
of observations and data, seminars to discuss issues, focus groups to determine collective
priorities, the use of 1:1 mock-ups, visits, and, of course, rigorous post-occupancy evaluation.
All three features are critical to using design as an agent in the change management process –
which, of course, was what the Andersen Worldwide project and, indeed, the British Airways
project described above, were all about.
New ways of working – the price of relevance
For architects, however, there is a cost in helping to achieve such successes – which might
partly explain their tardiness to accept the challenge to innovate. Architects and designers,
confronted by fee cutting as well as marginalisation, have often preferred to retreat into their
own private worlds accepting, like nineteenth century Bohemians shivering in their Parisian
garrets, the inevitability of being misunderstood and rejected. This is nonsense. Design must
be relevant. Architects must involve themselves in the issues of the day. Invention can and
must be used to facilitate change.
Integration is everything. Systems thinking, i.e. linking the design of the physical environment
with the design of information technology with the design of the use of human resources, is the
secret of success. An autonomous designer can no more achieve change by issuing unilateral
orders from on high than politically astute managers like Robert Ayling or John Lewis.
Neither, of course, would dream of such an approach. Architects and designers, if they wish
to unleash the potential of design, in the context of the change management that is now so
vital for organisational success, must learn to be humble enough to embrace three practical
conditions:
• a willing acceptance of the need for overall business leadership, setting targets,
articulating values, insisting on performance
• an absolute equivalence in the design process between the design of IT, the design of
the use of human resources and the design of the physical environment
• an enthusiastic involvement in the total design process of the clever, demanding,

sometimes unreliable end-users on whom business success undoubtedly depends.
Business, particularly in a time of rapid change, depends heavily on design. Architects and
designers must learn to relate design systematically to business and societal goals. The
corollary is that successful design depends on understanding business and society.
The equation linking supply and demand
The equation between supply and demand has been referred to more than once in this
chapter. Architects and designers – and, of course, engineers of every kind – have the ability
to straddle that equation. They can easily, if they want, manipulate it for the benefit of their
clients and also to advance the potential of architecture and design. Equations, of course, are
useless without measures, and measures are useless without values. What is absolutely
necessary, if office architecture is to become truly relevant to business, is to have reliable
measures that link business performance with the capacity of buildings, environmental
systems and interiors to accommodate and enhance that performance. Both sets of measures
must be expressed in the same terms if the equation is to work. Both sets of measures must
relate to organisational values and organisational purpose.
One powerful and systemic way of doing this is to follow the line of thought first
developed in The Responsible Workplace (Duffy et al., 1993) and taken further in Chapter 5
of The New Office (Duffy, 1997).
The gist of this argument is as follows. When it comes to matters of space use, all office
organisations, in an increasingly competitive world, must obey two iron laws to achieve their
commercial goals and, indeed, to stay in business. They must simultaneously drive down
occupancy costs – which in offices are often higher than IT and second only to the costs of
salaries – and use the physical environment to attract, retain, stimulate and inform the
increasingly valuable people who work for them. The first dimension, restraining occupancy
costs, is primarily a matter of efficiency, i.e. doing the most with the least resources. The
great management theorist, Peter Drucker, calls this ‘doing things right’. The second dimension
is much more open-ended. It is to do with effectiveness, i.e. establishing values, achieving
results by escaping from constraints, inventing unanticipated solutions, reframing the problem,
getting out of the box. This is what Peter Drucker calls ‘doing the right thing’.
Efficiency and effectiveness may seem to be contradictory. Working together they produce
a simple – but dynamic and purposeful – model in which a vector represents the resolution
of the two forces (Fig. 22.1).
Office organisations that do not feel themselves under any particular pressure to
330 Duffy
Figure 22.1 Adding value and minimising cost
achieve greater efficiency or effectiveness are likely to be willing to tolerate

conventional office environments in which space is allocated, as it has been for
decades, crudely by grade and status. The more the pressure grows to improve
business performance on both dimensions, the more likely organisations are to
allocate space by more rational criteria. When both pressures become extreme,
organisations are most likely to innovate. In today’s terms, this means taking
advantage of space use intensification. For example, some office organisations
may only be able to afford the quality of environment they need to attract the
best possible staff by sharing workplaces. Only by achieving greater efficiency
through sharing are they able to afford a richer, wider range of more effective
work settings.
Putting the same argument in another way, it is possible to explain with the
same logic (Fig. 22.2) why conventional North American and Northern European
offices have become the way they are. North American offices of the Dilbert
variety neither are particularly efficient (because they consume so much space
and so much energy) nor can they remotely be called effective (because they are
so crushingly unattractive and unstimulating). Northern European offices are not
Figure 22.2 The efficiency/effectiveness balance
efficient but often they are humane, attractive, lively, pleasant to work in – much more so
than most offices in the US. Japanese offices customarily are very densely occupied (thus
maximising efficiency) but are generally not the kinds of places that are likely to stimulate
knowledge workers (thus minimising effectiveness). The kinds of environments advanced
organisations are crying for – hence the impetus described above for design invention at
Broadgate, British Airways, Andersen Worldwide – are ones that maximise efficiency and
effectiveness simultaneously and in the same place. This is the goal for the future.
Measuring efficiency and effectiveness
Efficiency and effectiveness can both be measured, but in two very different ways. The
measurement of efficiency is direct – for example, floor plates that maximise the ratio of
usable to lettable area, increased density of occupation, reduction in the cost of churn,
increase in space sharing. Each of these brings a direct financial benefit to the bottom line
which can be measured in gains of so many per cent compared with other buildings.
The measurement of effectiveness, on the other hand, is indirect. The potential to enhance
the effective use of office space can be installed, but results cannot be guaranteed. There is a
big gap between the existence of a physical resource and the willingness and the ability of the
332 Duffy
people who inhabit it to exploit it. Nevertheless, not providing or taking away the same
resource has a quite disproportionate effect. Any possibility of exploitation is removed.
This is exactly analogous to what happens when a decision has to be made about the
installation of new software in PCs. The possession of the advanced software does not mean
that it will be used properly. However, not having the appropriate software rules out, quite
simply, the chance of successful exploitation.
It is exactly the same with office buildings. They can be designed like BA’s Waterside in
such a way as to increase the possibility of interaction. Like Andersen Worldwide they can
be crammed with opportunities to accommodate a wide range of different tasks. Both these
offices have been designed to add fresh resources and to express positive messages to staff.
In both cases enormous care has been taken to train everyone involved to understand
management’s message and to take advantage of the new resources – exactly as one would
with new software. The consequence in both cases has been to increase the likelihood of
beneficial use by a multiplying factor perhaps of three or four. Post-occupancy studies will
no doubt eventually reveal what has actually happened.
An important point has to be made here about the burden of proof. Most management
involves judgement. Most managerial decisions are made taking many parallel factors into
account. Most management depends upon complex and changing external factors. The design
of the working environment is no different. How things are done is often as important as
what is done. Certainty is rarely available. There is no point in demanding – as so often
happens when people want to block innovation in office design – higher (or indeed lower)
precision of prediction, proof or subsequent verification than would be expected in the
preparation of any other kind of business case for change.
A vision of the future
Managers should understand that design is much more than what it has often been reduced
to – a fashion accessory or a technical appendage. Both are far too easily brushed aside.
Design can instead be seen as a factor of production, given its capacity as a powerful catalyst
of change. The physical design of the office has an enormous potential to broadcast positive
as well as negative messages about what is and what is not important for management
purposes. The one big feature that design and management share – and both modes of
thinking are more similar than many people think – is organisational intent. Design is a
vitally important way of getting things done. It is the skill of using the physical resource of
buildings, space and furniture to solve the problems of users, clients and society in ways that
help them achieve better, and otherwise unattainable, futures.
Innovative organisations, especially those that are determined to manage the process of
change to their advantage, have begun to learn, once again, how to use the power of design.
The design of office space has been static for far too long. The inventive use of design to
increase efficiency and effectiveness, i.e. to drive down costs and to stimulate creativity
simultaneously, is revitalising not just how office organisations perform but also what offices
look like. That design is now coming to be recognised as a critical factor of production as well
as a powerful means of expressing management’s intentions will revitalise not just the future
of office architecture but the future of the design professions themselves.
References
Duffy, F. (1997) The New Office. London: Conran Octopus.

Duffy, F., Laing, A. and Crisp, V. (1993) The Responsible Workplace. Oxford: Butterworth
Architecture.
Appendix

Workplace: Summary of
Conference held at
Westminster Central Hall,
London, 29–30 October 1997
Can we design for productivity?
Buildings affect our existence. There is an interaction between our human senses and
our surroundings. Productivity is related to the morale of the people working for the
organisation as well as the attention level of the senses. It is fairly easy to tell when the
productivity is lower than it might be because absenteeism, medical records and
complaints become prevalent and work output is affected. There is a ‘hum’ in a place
where productivity is high. Individuals too, know when they are working effectively.
Productivity can be measured in absolute or comparative terms. Research on
productivity looks at individual needs rather than the responses of the group as a
whole. There is overwhelming evidence that personal control of the environment is
highly significant together with job satisfaction, effective work organisation and social
ambience.
There are a cluster of factors that are conducive to high productivity. They include
well-being, healthand comfort. Conveniently, these are more likely to occur in a building
which is well managed and has a low energy consumption. The act of producing
quality work gives a person some self-fulfilment and satisfaction. Informed
organisations are just beginning to understand the benefits of good workplace design
and to acknowledge the notion that a healthy workforce means a healthy
organisation.
Valerie Sutherland and Cary Cooper made the point that life within organisations is
one of constant change, with endless modifications to work structure and climate
fuelled by rapid technological and social changes. Identification of sources of stress
using an occupational stress indicator prevents problems, and indicates the need to
devise curative strategies for stress management in the workplace. Some degree of
pressure is an inevitable part of living in a constantly changing work environment and
this makes the audit and the identification of stress highly important.
Appendix 335
Charles and Chad Dorgan presented some convincing data about productivity
benefits. Their emphasis is on indoor air quality, which if not satisfactory affects the
health of the building occupants and results in reduced productivity. Their analysis
shows that the total productivity benefits amount to some $55 billion per year. Taking
into account the cost of installing indoor air quality improvements, this gain results in
an average simple payback time of just over half a year. The study was carried out by
focusing on the compilation of some 500 reports of published and unpublished work
which link indoor air quality and productivity in offices. Building wellness and
employee inventory, health and medical effects, health cost benefits, productivity
benefits and recommended improvements are all part of the methodology. Building
wellness is defined in terms of the rate of complaints, the degree of sick building
syndrome, and comfort.
The majority of studies indicated an average productivity loss of 10 per cent due to
poor indoor air quality. The study was concentrated on non-industrial buildings and
concluded that a one-time upgrade of these would cost almost $90 billion, with an
annual operating cost of nearly $5 billion, giving a total annual benefit of nearly $63
billion and resulting in a simple payback period of 1.4 years. The benefit was based on
a combination of productivity and health benefits.
David Mudarri from the United States Environment Protection Agency considered
the economics of installing enhanced quality environmental services in buildings and
highlighted the disparity between the great economic loss that society suffers from
poor indoor environment and the cost necessary to improve it. He believes that this in
some measure is due to an imbalance in the market place, because private entities that
want improved environments have been unable to translate this desire into an overt
expression of market demand that would justify the expenditure and risk that the
improvements require. He believes that some of the ultimate goals are good building
practice; a rational integration of energy and indoor environmental polices; guidance
and software packages for building owners.
While acknowledging that economic losses from poor indoor environments have not
been rigorously studied, it is contended that there is good evidence that the economic
losses sustained by industrialised nations are substantial. The United States
Environmental Protection Agency estimates that a total annual cost of indoor air
pollution in the United States is approximately $6 billion due to cancer and heart
disease, but approximately $60 billion due to reductions in productivity. The
productivity loss was derived from self-reported survey data, and represents an average
productivity loss of approximately 3 per cent for all office workers, or approximately
twice that level for all those workers actually reporting some loss.
Other evidence is quoted which shows that the annual savings and productivity
gains from buildings improvements in the USA range from $12 to $125 billion for
336 Clements-Croome
improved worker performance, compared with $17 to $33 billion for improvements in
health. It is reckoned that the benefits that would result from improvements vary from
18 to 47 times the cost of the improvements. The work of Dorgan and Dorgan has
already been referred to, which established a productivity gain worth $63 billion per
year, with a $90 billion initial investment giving a payback of 1.4 years.
It is reasonable to conclude that modest improvements in the quality of environment
inside buildings can result in very large social benefits. Perhaps building owners do not
appreciate this assessment, or maybe the required changes in the patterns of behaviour
are not easy to come to terms with. Tenants and owners market their building space
according to its location, appearance, parking and other items that are visible and
tangible, in spite of the fact that issues of environmental comfort and building services
rate high on the list of major complaints by tenants. The effort in time and money for
commissioning, writing maintenance manuals and performing maintenance are not
considered as being an investment.
Enhanced environmental systems offer a saving due to reduced maintenance as well
as from energy conservation, but these savings are insignificant when compared to the
potential health, comfort and productivity gains. The 30 per cent saving in energy, and
in the maintenance of building services systems, corresponds to a cost of about $2.5 to
$3.5 per square metre, but a 3 per cent loss of productivity associated with poor
environmental quality corresponds to about $45 to $60 per square metre; in addition
there are the impacts of discomfort and poor health on the occupants.
In order to make these issues marketable there is an urgent need for indoor
environmental quality protocols in the form of guidelines and standards. In these there
needs to be a set of procedures that integrate the needs of energy cost reduction with
the needs for good indoor environmental quality. The US Department of Energy, in the
US Environmental Protection Agency, has begun to develop a protocol in conjunction
with a wide variety of stake-holders which will be part of the International Performance
and Verification Protocol.
Demand side management reflects awareness of the utilities to encourage energy
efficiency, rather than supporting energy growth patterns. Performance contracting
provides the mechanism by which energy savings from energy-efficient investments
can be used to pay for better environmental systems. One objective of the international
protocol is to facilitate these mechanisms by standardising measurement and verification
procedures.
Owners should market and advertise the environmental quality of the spaces they
provide, and there would then be a good chance of the building owner’s net revenue
potential being enhanced. It is also important to emphasise that the term building
performance does not just refer to energy and operating costs, but also to how well
Appendix 337
the building services provide the occupants of the space with healthy conditions
which help to maximise productivity.
Audrey Kaplan described the barriers to productivity as being interruptions;
discomfort; illness symptoms; a lack of privacy; resources constraints and the corporate
culture. She went on to describe productivity as depending on.
• the physical facilities and infrastructure

• facilities management and practices
• occupant behaviour
• the management approach.
The environment is not neutral and can enhance or hinder the work output of an
organisation. People react to the environment as a whole, and it is essential to remove
any obstacles that impede the effort in their work. Well-being depends on a healthy
mind and a healthy body. Research has shown that where an environment exhibits
more than two building sickness syndrome symptoms the productivity tends to
decrease.
John Jukes gave a very cogent account of how people working with computers can
have an optimum healthy workplace environment to reduce stress and hence improve
productivity. He estimates that there are some 100 million people working with
computers around the world, and employers lose £250 billion per year in reduced
productivity mainly because some 60 million people are suffering physical discomfort.
In his experience, sitting in front of a PC all day can result in a person’s performance
dropping off by about 50 per cent without their being aware of it. His work has
established that the major sources of workplace health problems are: tired eyes; bad
posture; airborne carbon particulates; low humidity; flickering lights; quality of light;
noise; and fungus spores which breed in carpets.
These symptoms have an impact on the immune system, which means the body’s
defences are low and the slightest stress can cause sickness. For example, people who
sit badly do not breathe properly, so there is not enough oxygen circulating to the brain
and they slow down, which results in a lowering of the immune system. Airborne
carbon particles become positively charged; because of their small size they overcome
the body’s filtration system and enter the bloodstream. Again, the immune system
suffers.
There is no magic solution and each case requires a fresh approach. Good posture,
outside views where the eyes can relax looking at more distant objects, plants to
decrease the CO2 and lower the temperature, careful choice of furnishings, are all
important issues. Many questions remain unanswered. We do not know enough about
geopathetic stress or about Feng Shui and many other factors.
338 Clements-Croome
John Jukes considers that it is not a matter of whether an employer can afford to
provide such an environment, but rather that the cost of not investing in a quality
environment is paid for in the form of additional staffing and occupancy costs.
Improvement in personal productivity can be translated into tangible staff savings of
the order of 12 to 16 per cent. The cost of implementing improvements to the working
environment is equivalent to around 4 per cent.
People, concentration and work
To be productive, one’s concentration has to be sustained at a high level and remain

uninterrupted. How do we think when we are working? How does our conscious mind
work when it is being bombarded by all sorts of inputs from the environment around
us?
Liam Hudson is satisfied that people are affected by their surroundings but is more
concerned about the effect on occupants of half-hidden psychological needs. He comes
to an interesting conclusion from his life’s experience. Work production seems to have
gone well in temporary or converted types of buildings, whereas productivity has
often been difficult to achieve in custom-built buildings. This idea is described in
Stewart Brand’s book entitled How Buildings Learn. There are, however, good modern
as well as good old simple buildings. Perhaps it is inconsistency that remains a problem.
The Latham Report (Constructing the Team, 1994) acknowledges this. To probe the
matter further Liam Hudson concludes that there needs to be a resonance between the
imagination and our material environment; there has to be a parallel which allows our
buildings to act as both vehicle and metaphor for our states of mind.
He goes on to make another point: most of us think poorly most of the time. The
assumption is made that we know how to think, and is treated as a kind of automatic
process. Edward de Bono has been trying to instil good thinking in school children. It
is suggested that it would be a good idea to foster a new habit of conversation between
architects, psychologists and engineers. A common language might evolve that would
allow working environments to be designed which yield to conditions, rather than
dominate them. Creative tension is valuable.
David Schwartz and Stephen Kaplan lead us into new directions in the theory and
assessment of attention and concentration. Mental effort is expended with the objective
of reaching some goal. Without a goal or objective we let the outer world’s impressions,
and the constantly changing currents of memory and imagination, carry us where they
will. There are many obstacles in conserving the mental effort required for concentration.
There are multiple sources of information around us; only a small part of this information
is likely to be relevant to any particular goal. Effective thinking therefore requires the
Appendix 339
ability to select, both from our knowledge and from the world, the information required
to attain the objective.
There are certain limits in our capacity to concentrate. A distinction has to be made
between jobs that are repetitive and vigilant in nature and those that are creative and
open-ended. Intrinsically, demanding tasks require one to think. When we remove
opportunities for exploration, for creativity and experimentation and for wrestling
with uncertainty, we take away the very conditions that nurture excellence and remove
the features which make intellectually demanding work so satisfying. Extraneous
interference such as random noise, interruptions, lack of privacy, poor lighting, stuffy
atmospheres all interfere with the capacity to think and fatigue our cognitive ability. It
is simply that more mental effort is expended in managing the extraneous interference,
which leaves less energy for the demands of the task in hand. The result is that people
become ineffective and productivity declines. There is also the possibility of increased
irritability, which will magnify the rate of decline.
Many simple pencil-and-paper tasks can be used to measure concentration. The
point is made that the effect of some workplace intervention on workers’ ability to
concentrate can be studied, but it is important to administer several different measures
to produce reliable results. In this way we can study the independent contribution of
concentration ability to the performance of various tasks, and also study how this
ability changes in response to our attempts to enhance it.
Roy Davis considered the characteristics of skilled tasks from the point of view of
their potential demands and gave a few examples to show how better design can lead to
improved comfort and efficiency. There is no reason why work environments should
not be as satisfying as those that surround us when we enjoy leisure. Work can be
comfortable but it can also be fulfilling and enjoyable. Again the point is made that
skills involve coordinated goal-directed activities. Productivity is high when relevant
information is filtered from the environment and used to achieve the aims of the goal-
directed activities. The control of attention can move between levels. One can imagine
that as a result of training, actions at lower levels become almost automatic, whereas
organisational design issues take place at a higher level and much attention is needed to
achieve this. Roy Davis went on to describe the problem of mapping physical variables
onto psychological ones, and how it is important to take account of the user’s experience.
However, people do not always say what they mean. Furthermore, many workplace
skills are based on implicit, procedural knowledge which is difficult, if not impossible,
to put into words. Hence it is important to watch what people do and analyse their
behaviour as well as listen to what they are saying.
Jean Neumann brought some important matters to our attention using three vivid
case studies. Buildings are designed, constructed and managed by a variety of people
340 Clements-Croome
who perceive different priorities and needs as to what constitutes a productive and
healthy workplace. Often there can be inadequate consultation with a broad sample of
the user population. This means there will be a mismatch between users’ perceptions
and needs and those of the building design team. The productivity and well-being of
the building design and construction team tends to take priority over the productivity
and well-being of the users in some cases. Effective participation of the various user
groups is vital. Negotiation and collaboration are highly important.
Michel Cabanac believes that human liberty is the freedom to choose one’s own
way to maximise pleasure and joy, which although transient give contrast and variety
to what might be described as stable, neutral or indifferent conditions. In the context of
the workplace this means that buildings need to respond to individual human needs;
people need to be adaptable too.
Best practice in gaining a competitive edge
Philip Ward described a £600 billion opportunity for CO 2 reduction brought about by
energy savings. Comfort, low energy and high productivity go together. All are aspects
of sustainability.
Oseland and Williams considered how best practice can improve productivity and,
in particular, the relationship between energy efficiency and staff productivity. Total
energy costs of a typical office can be offset by an increase in productivity in the order
of 1 per cent. They maintain that an increase in productivity of up to 8 per cent is
needed to offset running and installation costs of heating, ventilating and air-conditioning
systems. Their research establishes that energy-efficient lighting and the provision of
individual control increases productivity, while at the same time saving energy. Good
design, installation, commissioning and maintenance ensure that energy efficiency
gains are continual, and this ensures staff satisfaction and improved productivity.
Adrian Leaman and Bill Bordass illustrated the question of productivity in buildings
in terms of the killer variables. In other words, the variables that have a critical
influence on the overall behaviour of the buildings systems. The present state of
knowledge suggests that losses or gains are up to 15 per cent of turnover in a typical
office organisation, and these might be attributable to design management and the
indoor environment. Uncomfortable staff tend to show consistently lower productivity.
There are also associations with related factors such as perceived health, management,
design and use characteristics which improve perceptions of individual welfare, and
also contribute towards better energy efficiency. There is also evidence to suggest that
people need some variation in the levels of environmental factors. These variations can
stimulate the arousal system, a fact which was demonstrated by the early work of
Appendix 341
Pepler, which indicated that for short periods it was better for people to work in
slightly cooler, rather than warmer conditions relative to the neutral zone.
The killer variables are described as personal control, responsiveness, building
depth and work groups. Personal control includes heating, cooling, lighting, ventilation
and noise. Building depth is very much concerned with the daylighting characteristics
of the building. Deeper buildings may, but do not always, result in lower satisfaction
and productivity. But depth of space is also a correlate for other variables which affect
human performance. For example, it relates to complexity, because services systems
have to cope with perimeter zones as well as central zones which have quite different
thermal characteristics.
Perceptions of productivity appear to be higher in smaller and more integrated
work groups.
Leaman and Bordass conclude that system control, rapid response to the
environment, shallow plan forms and the services selected to match activities are
particularly important issues with regard to productivity. There is a need to improve
the feedback process, the integrated design process, the care of the occupants, the
formulation of the brief. There is a disturbing tendency to forget conveniently the bad
news which can help to rectify situations. It is important to understand the contexts,
the risks and the manageability of systems by treating the perceptions of the occupants
about their environment seriously.
John Worthington made the point that the measure of productivity can be both the
effectiveness of the process and the performance of the building for its occupants in
supporting business objectives. The briefing process is important in establishing clients’
needs, sets out the process of procurement and establishes the measures against which
performance can be evaluated. In North America there is now emerging a new
professional role for a design brief manager, who should understand the language
and expectations of both user and hence, the business, and the design and construction
team. The wording used by John Worthington in describing design brief management is
interesting. He writes that it provides ‘a framework in which the design team can
elegantly allocate the available resources to maximise the clients’ needs’. The brief,
therefore, is concerned with defining the problem and identifying the solution area in
order to find a balance between maximising effectiveness (i.e. productivity) and
minimising costs (i.e. efficiency). This work clearly needs to be integrated with the
process of identifying the various user groups and ensuring that there is sufficient
dialogue between them and the design and construction team.
The Kajima Building in Tokyo (KI building) is an example of a sensitive environment
design where an attempt is made to address the occupants’ multi-sensory experience
of their environment. This is a reference to the fact that workers exposed to intelligent
342 Clements-Croome
buildings for extended periods of time can suffer a physical and psychological strain
called technostress. A fragrance control system is installed based on the human reaction
to various aromas which causes a pattern of freshening the environment, sustaining
concentration and coping with fatigue. This recognises people’s ultradian rhythms
which pulse every 1.5 to 2 hours and are characterised by attaining optimum arousal
allowing peak performance, followed by stress. Ultradian thrythms are a cyclical
pattern of rest and activity.
Biomusic has been composed for the building based on an analysis of how human
brain waves can be used in the auditory response process. The music programme
comprises a relaxed state denoted by alpha waves of 8–12 Hz, and beta waves denoting
stimulating states of 14–20 Hz. Fluctuations in air flow reflect the heartbeat rate, again
relating the rhythms of our environment to those in the body.
The result of these measures was that comfort dissatisfaction was decreased to a
fifth of what it was before the workers moved in to the new building. The greatly
increased satisfaction level, it is claimed, resulted in an increase of productivity.
Potential clients are invited to come to the KI Building so they can experience the
environment, which also results in a saving of travel time for the employees of the
company.
The work by Walter Kroner on environmentally responsive workstations is well
known. This is a classic study which shows that improving architectural and
environmental design contributes to an overall increase of productivity of 16 per cent.
Environmentally responsive workstations increased the level of work and productivity
by nearly 3 per cent. Again this emphasises the need for the individual to control his
or her own work environment. The work also supports findings of other research
workers that increases in satisfaction generally mean an increase in productivity.
The future for workplace and environmental design
Andrew Carter believes that there is significant evidence to show that physical
environments enhance productivity; however, it is difficult to quantify this. He calls
for further research to examine a range of models of productive behaviour and to
evaluate the changes in revenue or output that can result. He demonstrated this by
using the model of productive behaviour known as high-performance teams. The
idea of introducing competitive teams working within organisations has recently been
used very effectively. Very simple high-productive strategies have been produced,
generated by the people themselves. The drive for customer focus is very important as
a vision for an organisation or a profession. Concentration is then given to all of the
issues that can help to raise productivity in quality and quantity terms. Productivity
Appendix 343
is affected and influenced by the response of people working in their physical

workplace.
He went on to describe a particular case study involving the facilities management
function. The model used was based on understanding the requirements of the customer;
using valid data collection and statistical analysis techniques; analysing the business
processes to identify opportunities for improvement; involving a wide cross-section
of departments to derive the understanding about the options needed for improvement;
setting up and managing of user groups to evaluate and participate in using the services.
Andrew Carter continued to describe some particular examples covering hot-desking;
open plan working; a centrally managed records service. These projects achieved 22
per cent reduction in space; a 7 per cent increase in people accommodated; 25 per cent
reduction of operating costs; and an increase in customer satisfaction.
Max Fordham contends that the human species has not adapted to meet the extremes
of environment, but accepts that we do adapt quite easily in the common middle
ground usually referred to as the neutral zone. Does a reduction in the environmental
stress result in an increase in the likelihood of being more productive? Is the internal
state of mind and the impact of fellow workers on the individual important? The
human side to the story is that productivity improves when people know they are
loved and are given special attention; this is a kind of gratitude expressed as a reward
by an improvement in productivity. Perhaps this is a lesson for facilities managers, or
sends a message to those building owners who do not employ facilities managers. If
buildings are poorly maintained and not cared for, and occupants not listened to, then
productivity will fall.
Environmental conditions do not need to be tightly specified, as the human body
trades one sense off with another one, but also each sense has a considerable range of
adaptability. Satisfaction with thermal environment can easily be achieved by altering
our clothing. Attention was drawn to the fact that the design of clothes can allow free
and easy movement and comfort at quite low air temperatures, as has been done in
previous centuries. On this basis, buildings could be designed which did not require
heating.
Every building has particular requirements and so it is important to clarify the
context of each project. In general, building mass, building form, the use of cool night
air and the requirements for sound and lighting can be achieved by combining the best
of modern technology with simple things such as curtains, shutters and blinds. The
added advantage of using these simple things is that they offer the individual personal
control.
David Wyon discussed individual control at the workplace. He described how the
environmental stimuli provided by visual, auditory or thermal information can be a
344 Clements-Croome
distraction as well as a pleasure. The more degrees of freedom that can be designed into
the workplace, the better, so that the user has personal control. The point is made
again that optimising uniform conditions to accord with group average requirements
ignores individual choice. Environmentally responsive workstations offer the user
control and choice. Walter Kroner also referred to these systems.
Future workplaces will contain many, or perhaps all, of the degrees of freedom that
have been identified. Building control systems in the future will have access to many
more sources of information than they have at present. Sensors will be placed at every
desk and will act as a personal environmental diary. Users will be able to access the
building control management system at any time to obtain online information.
The work of Volker Hartkopf and Marshall Hemphill at Carnegie Mellon University
demonstrates the concept of total building performance which is a distinctive feature
of intelligent buildings. User satisfaction, organisational flexibility, technological
adaptability, environment and energy effectiveness are key issues. User satisfaction
needs to be a consideration of thermal, acoustic, and visual environments; spatial
quality; air quality; and building integrity. Human physiological, psychological, and
sociological needs have to be offset against the economic needs of the organisation.
Experience was gained by studying buildings in Japan, Germany, France, Canada, the
USA and the UK over a period of three years. The pattern of organising performance
criteria for evaluating the integration of systems was drawn up using the network of
companies in the Advanced Building Systems Integration Consortium which was
established at the Centre for Building Performance and Diagnostics at Carnegie Mellon
University in 1998.
The intelligent workplace was demonstrated by the laboratory recently built on the
rooftop of the Margaret Morrison building at Carnegie Mellon University. The design
and construction includes many innovations such as a dynamic layered facade; a bolted
module construction; an open web floor structure; floor-based support systems;
intelligent controls with learning systems. The laboratory provides a catalogue of user
preferences and experiences. It is already becoming apparent that some standards do
not reflect what users prefer. Examples are quoted of preferred higher air velocities and
higher brightness ratios for lighting.
John Doggart set out the guidelines and tools available which will influence future
design. Designers have to reconcile costs, spatial layout, services and aesthetic issues,
and when this is successful, buildings are generally healthier and productivity gains are
more likely to be evident. Again it was pointed out that the environmental standards
often used do not reflect user preferences. However, it is important to take each case
study and relate the design to the context of that particular building. Not all buildings
should be naturally ventilated, nor should all buildings be air-conditioned. Evidence is
Appendix 345
quoted from the 1997 European Respiratory Society Conference which reports that
people working in air-conditioned offices are almost two and a half times more likely
to suffer from respiratory infections than those working in naturally ventilated
buildings. This resulted in twice as many days being taken off by the staff in air-
conditioned buildings. However, there may be a very good case for having an air-
conditioned building in some situations. Again the need for good-quality daylight,
personal controls, office building materials and building form were emphasised.
John Doggart showed evidence relating building health to days taken off by
employees. The BRE Environmental Assessment Method was seen as being helpful in
reducing problems, mainly because sustainability means low-energy and low-polluting
buildings; generally these buildings are healthier and people are more satisfied, hence
more productive.
Frank Duffy asked why we bothered with offices. Physical resources drive down
costs (efficiency) and should stimulate creativity (effectiveness). Business and
architecture are interrelated, and intelligent buildings are ones that are adaptable in the
sense that they have responsive building management, space planning and business
organisation systems in place. A process cannot be carried out without understanding
in detail what people do and what their aspirations are. Rapidly involving information
technology and communication systems are killing conventions. People are working
more to their natural rhythms and therefore there is a great need to understand what
these rhythms are.
New ways of working link the nature of work; the space for people to work
individually or in groups; and the systems selected to control the building environment
as three principal interacting attributes.
Productivity of buildings in use requires new thinking and decision-making systems.
This involves integrating change management, facilities and technology. Targets
need to be set for improvement and they have to be evaluated.
Conclusions
The Conference established several common themes, as follows.
• We need to cut across the grain of traditional practice from time to time. We need
to question and renew our thinking. This means being open to inputs from other
professionals such as occupational psychologists.
• It is clear that productivity is influenced by a number of factors including
the environment, and that considerable economic and health benefits can
be achieved. It should not be a matter of whether an employer can afford to
346 Clements-Croome
provide a good-quality environment, but rather that the cost of not investing in
this will be paid for by additional staffing and increased occupancy costs.
• It is possible to assess and measure productivity in absolute or comparative
terms. There is some ambiguity as to whether productivity means an increase in
the work output of the people working in the offices or an increase in productivity
by the design and construction team. There is no reason why it should not apply
in both circumstances. The emphasis of this Conference has been on increasing
the productivity of people working in offices.
• It is possible to identify sources of stress, which helps to prevent problems.
Where this is not done, stress management in the workplace is very important.
It has been mentioned that sitting in front of a PC all day can result in personal
performance dropping off by some 50 per cent. It is said that the average person
in Britain watches television 5 hours day in their leisure time, and if we add this
to the work time occupation, it makes one wonder what quality of life we are
seeking.
• It has been suggested that most of us think poorly most of the time. Effective
thinking requires us to have the ability to select both from our knowledge and
from the world around us. There are limits on our capacity to concentrate and we
need to understand these.
• The variables that have a critical influence on the overall behaviour of building
systems have been described as being personal control, responsiveness, building
depth and work groups. Staff that are uncomfortable tend to show consistently
lower productivity. Losses or gains of up to 15 per cent of turnover can be
attributable to design management and the indoor environment.
• There is a need for brief quality management. This involves identifying the
various user groups and ensuring that there is sufficient dialogue between them
and the design and construction team.
• Buildings should be a multi-sensory experience and should engage the basic
human senses. Buildings that do not do this give rise to inhuman environments
and dissatisfaction.
• Personal control has been referred to by many speakers and a particular example
of the environmental responsive workstation has been described. Future
workplaces probably will have many degrees of freedom built into them. This is
only part of effective total building performance, which is a distinctive feature of
intelligent buildings.
• Designers have to reconcile costs, spatial layouts, services and aesthetic issues
and when this is successfully achieved, buildings are generally healthier and
productivity gains are more likely to be evident.
Appendix 347
• Facilities managers have a responsibility for the various user groups. The
quality of human nature is that whilst being very adaptable, they want to know
that their environment is being cared for with their interests in mind.
• There is a great disparity between the great economic loss that society
suffers from poor indoor environment and the cost saved by improving it.
Modest improvements in the quality of the environment can result in very large
social benefits, as we have already said. Tenants and owners acknowledge this
but continue to market their building space according to location, appearance,
parking and other tangible factors. In order to make productivity-dependent
issues marketable there is a need to consider an indoor environmental quality
protocol in a similar way to what the US is proposing, and to effect demand-
side management and performance contracting.
• Although it is important that clients understand the ways of human behaviour in
their organisations, and this should be recognised in the formulation of briefs for
building design and management, the individual also has a responsibility to
understand and manage his or her daily rhythms. In this way productivity
will rise and people will be more fulfilled.
This summary refers to presentations made at the Conference. Not all presenters
wrote a chapter for this book, and some authors did not attend the Conference. My
own contributions are written – chapters 1, 3 and 10.
Reading
September 1998
Index
3I principle of user empowerment 194 Amsterdam, NMB Bank 21–2

Aalto, Alvar 34 analytic hierarchy process (AHP) 132–4
ABSIC (Advanced Building Systems priority factor analysis 147–51,
Integration Consortium) 272, 274–5, 159–60
279, 344 Andersen Worldwide 327–8, 331, 332
acute respiratory disease (ARD) 114, appraisal, affective see affective
119, 121 appraisal
Adams, Scott 324 architects 324, 325, 328–9
adaptability, human 242, 343 see also architecture
adaptation level 61 architectural design 64, 301
Advanced Building Systems Integration architecture
Consortium (ABSIC) 272, 274–5, and affective appraisal 64–6
279, 344 interrelation with buildings 345
affective appraisal 59, 63–6 and senses 33–4
see also emotion sustainable 275, 277
affective experience 56–7 Taylorist legacy on 323, 324
AHP see analytic hierarchy process see also architects
air-conditioning ARD (acute respiratory disease) 114,
compared to natural ventilation 119, 121
180–1, 344 arousal
cost-effectiveness of 8–9 and environmental stimulus 60
in KI Building 281–93 as a key dimension of mood 58
lack of agreements on 315 and stress 78, 211–13
local control 278 arousal approach 60
in mixed-mode buildings 187–8 Arup Associates 325
problems with 306 ASHRAE
and productivity 10 definitions 100, 101
see also HVAC; ventilation Standards (62–1989 and 55–1992) 4,
air contaminants, ASHRAE definitions 98, 107, 109, 116, 117, 124, 279
111 Asia, lighting in 194
airflow control 282–5, 288–91, 292 see also Japan; Philippines
airports 64–5, 67 AssessA 310–12
air quality see indoor air quality assessment methods
Alberts, Ton 21–2 for concentration and attention
allergic reactions 308 242–54
American Society of Heating, using analytic hierarchy process
Refrigeration and Air-conditioning 129–63
Engineers see ASHRAE see also evaluation; questionnaires
350 Clements-Croome
attention London office building 138–51

during training 228–9 Maidenhead office building
and performance 227–41 151–62
theory and assessment of 242–54 London see London
see also concentration; mental effort; numeric keypads in 238–9
thinking and stress at work 13
attitude, social aspect of 53 Taylorist legacy in 323
Australia, mixed-mode buildings in 188 see also United Kingdom
Ayling, Robert 326–7 British Airways 326–7, 331
Broadgate Office 325–6, 331
behaviour 40–1, 56 Buddhism 33
and environment 60–2 building depth 180–3, 187, 340, 346
goal-directed 52 building design
optimisation of 47–8 innovators in 325–6
behavioural final common path 40–1 reluctance to include personal control
behaviour constraint approach 61 175–6
behaviourist school 56 role in productivity 169
beliefs and expectations of lighting building down barriers approach 269
213–16 building form, future design and
benefits 309–10
cost see costs and economic benefits building management 178
of delegating control 196 see also facilities management
of improved air quality, USA 114–15 building managers, cost analysis for
of individual control 192–205 100–4
see also health; productivity building owners 94–7, 336
best practice and competitive edge costs for 98–104
340–2 building performance 104, 336
bias, freedom from, in measurements total 272–3, 344
129 building-related illness (BRI) 112, 114,
biomusic 291–2, 341–2 121
blinds and shutters 76, 194, 343 Building Research Establishment
bolted modular construction 277 Environmental Assessment Method
bottom-up theories of perception 55 (BREEAM) 308, 344
brain buildings
activity of, and concentration 37 BRI see building-related illness (BRI)
relationship with mind 30 costs of 96–7
rhythms 3–4 intelligent see intelligent buildings
right and left sides of 25, 38 KI Building 281–93
see also consciousness; mental effort; as multi-sensory experience 34–6
thinking office see offices
Brand, Stewart 338 old, compared to purpose built 338
BREEAM (Building Research performance see building
Establishment Environmental performance
Assessment Method) 308, 344 SBS see sick building syndrome (SBS)
BRI see building-related illness thermal capacity of 75
Bristol, One Bridewell Street case study trend to complexity and size 187–8
176–7 types of 19–20
Britain wellness inventory, USA 113,
building temperatures, and comfort 117–19, 120
73–4 see also workplace
case studies 325–7 building sickness 12, 308
Bristol 176–7 building size see building depth
Appendix 351
building wellness categories 112–13, and productivity 167–8

115–17, 118, 120 self-assessment of 145–7, 157–9
Byron, Chris 326 comfort cooling 306
common currency, pleasure and joy as
CAD systems 314 40–1
carbon dioxide reduction 71–6, 340 communication, lighting and 213
see also energy conservation competitive edge, best practice and
carbon particulates 316, 337 340–2
career, changes in the concept of 83–4 complaints 95, 176–80, 196, 197
Carnegie Mellon University 272, 275–6, complexity 175, 178, 180, 187–8
343–4 and building depth 181–3, 341
case studies computers
Bristol office 176–7 lighting for 210
colour coordination, but culture ignored optimising the working environment
261–2 313–19, 337
great building that does not work and stress 81, 286–7, 341
262–3 time spent in front of 345
KI Building 281–93, 341–2 to control subsystems 276, 279
London office 138–51 concentration 338–40
Maidenhead office 151–62 and brain activity 3–4, 37
West Bend Mutual 204 limits on 346
Westinghouse Furniture Systems 9–10 theory and assessment 242–54
windows omitted 260–1 see also attention; mental effort
category-matching task 251–2 conceptual framework for information
cathedrals 18, 20, 21 processing 53
CBPD (Centre for Building Performance conceptual model for affective appraisal
and Diagnostics) 272, 274–6, 279, 344 of spaces 64–6
chair and desk height 315 conflicts of motivations 45
change consciousness 29–38
creative response needed 22 nature of 30–2
and design function 324–5 visual 30, 31–2
and stress management 334 see also brain; mental effort; thinking
in the workplace 77–89, 275 construction process
changing nature of work, and stress design brief managers in 341
77–89 management of 265
Chartres Cathedral 18 and users
chemical plant, lack of windows in consultation 339–40
260–1 involvement in 259, 266–8,
Chicago, Andersen Worldwide 327–8 269–71
climate, organizational, changes to 84–5 right to influence design 263
clothing consultation 266, 339–40
and building temperatures 73–4, 343 see also decision-making; delegation;
insulation effect 197–8, 199 empowerment
cognitive stages in information contingent employment 81–2
processing 53 control
cognitive theories, emotion and 56 delegation of 194–7
colour coordination case study 261–2 individual see individual control
combi offices 195 local see local control
comfort perceived, and workgroup size 183,
definitions of 71–6 184, 185
as a multidimensional construct 62–3 personal see personal control
and pleasure 44–6 thermal see thermal control
352 Clements-Croome
controls demand, supply and, linking 329–31

airflow 282–5, 288–91, 292 demand side management 98, 336, 346
in future design 307 depth, building 180–3, 187, 340, 346
intelligent see intelligent controls design 324–5, 332–3
systems, future of 196–7 and affective appraisal 65–6
conversation, lighting and 213 architectural 64, 301
cooling, comfort 306 conceptualisation of 64
see also air-conditioning current theorists 67
costs and economic benefits environmental 342–5
of air-conditioning 8–9 future 304–12, 344
building costs 96–7 good examples 310, 325–8
of good design 310, 311, 312 and implicit knowledge 240–1
of indoor air quality 125, 335 and productivity 169, 334–8
administrative 115, 196 questionnaire 134–6
health 114, 121–2 reluctance to include personal control
poor quality 337–8 175–6
USA research on 114–15 user involvement 266–71
and indoor environment 318 managers and employees 259–71
enhanced services 93–104 of windows 306–7
improving 7–9, 346 see also designers
lack of market 96, 98–100 design brief managers 341
poor 93–4, 335–6 designers
of lost productivity 304 override users’ needs 265
of new ways of working 328–9 reconciling demands on 346
of stress 13 and systems thinking 328–9
creativity and workgroup size 183–6
and change 22 see also design
and manic-depressive illness 36–7 diagnosing occupational stress 85–6
and workplaces 18–28 displays, analogue and digital 230–1
crowding, gender and 63 dispositions, emotional 59
cubicles 195 diversifying workspaces 292
cues 230 Drucker, Peter 329
culture dust mites, allergic reaction to 308
designers ignore 261–2, 324–5 dynamic layered facades 276–7
influences on symbolism 233
curative stress management strategies 88 EAP (employee assistance programmes)
88
daylight eating, pleasure and 41–2, 43, 44
and health and productivity 5–6 ecological approach 62
preferred 215 effectiveness and efficiency 329–32,
redirection panels for 276–7 341, 345
and window design 306–7 effect regulation model 57
see also windows efficiency
daylight full-spectrum lighting 316–17 and effectiveness 329–32, 341, 345
decision-making, involvement in 266–8 and thermal comfort 9
decoration, office 141, 154, 261–2 effort, mental see mental effort
definitions emotion 51–68
of comfort 71–6 beliefs, and expectations 213–16
indoor air quality, ASHRAE and gender and psyche 26–7
guidelines 110–12 and knowledge 23
see also terminology and life energy 25
delegation of control 194–7 using questionnaires for 131
Appendix 353
see also affective appraisal environmental services, enhanced

emotional dispositions 59 93–104
emotional episodes 60 environment surveys 137–8
employee assistance programmes (EAP) episodes, emotional 60
88 ERW see environmentally responsive
employees workstations
in decision-making 266–8 ESCO (energy service company) 98–9
in design processes 259–71 Europe 330
management-employee relations lighting in 194
207–8 Mediterranean countries 306, 309
productivity see productivity numeric keypads in 238–9
employment, patterns of 81–2 SCANVAC 200
empowerment 194, 266 UK see United Kingdom
see also decision-making; delegation European Union 73, 199–200
energy conservation 72–6, 340 evaluation 310–11
and IMCDs 196 and environmental meaning 52–3
and indoor environment policies post-occupancy evaluation 286,
97–8, 99 287–8, 289–91
at the Intelligent Workplace 277 see also assessment; measurements
and lighting 75–6, 217, 275 expectations, lighting and 213–16
and reducing costs 98–100, 336 experience, knowledge and 23
reducing indoor air quality by 96
see also carbon dioxide reduction facades, dynamic layered 276–7
energy costs, office, USA 13–14, 340 facilities management 176–80, 185–6,
energy (emotional) 21, 25 307
energy and environment service and productivity 187
company (EESCO) 101 responsibilities to users 346
energy service company (ESCO) 98–9 see also building management
environment Fanger Comfort Vote 72, 73
and behaviour 60–2 fan noise, acceptable levels of 200–2
combinations of factors 31 fatigue, mental 244–5, 246–7
costs of improving 7–9 finishes, decorative 308
and emotion 51–68 flicker, fluorescent lighting and 210–11,
fragrance 285–8, 289 213
see also odour floors 261–2, 277–8
and future design 342–5 fluorescent lighting 210–11, 213, 214
and health 4–9 form, building 309–10
human adaptation to 71 Foster, Sir Norman 325
indoor see indoor environment fragrance environment 285–8, 289
optimising the 313–19 see also odour and smell
and productivity 342–3, 345 Frankel, Neil 327
impact of ERWs on 296–301 fungus spores 317
in self-rated questionnaires 136 future
in London study 145–7 delegation of control in 196–7
Maidenhead results 157–9, 161–2 design guidelines and tools 304–12,
thermal 281–5, 286, 343 344
environmentally responsive and new ways of working 323–33
workstations (ERW) 195, 295–303,
342, 343 gender 26–7
see also individual microclimate and crowding 63
control devices (IMCDs) and employment patterns 82
environmental meaning 52–3, 62–3 General Services Agency 274
354 Clements-Croome
glare 210, 213 IAQ see indoor air quality (IAQ)

goal-directed behaviour 52 icons, visual symbols and 231–9
goals, obstacles and 243–4 IEQ see indoor environment quality
guidelines, future design and 304–12 IESNA standards 279
illuminance 214, 223
happiness, joy and 45–6 see also lighting
Hare, Nicholas 325 IMCD see individual microclimate
Hawthorne experiments 207–8 control devices
health 334 imperceptibility 54–5
and air-conditioning 344 individual control
asthma, occupational 112, 113, 119, in environmentally responsive
125 workstations 297
and daylight 5–6 field experiment 204
and environment 4–9 means and benefits 192–205
hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP) need for 193–4
112, 113, 119, 125 problems with 215
and indoor air quality and productivity 340
benefits of 109–10 clear findings 302–3
cost benefits of 114, 121–2 estimating impact of 202–4
poor 119–21, 334–5 thermal 200–2
USA research on 113, 119–21 see also local control; personal
and lighting 5–6 control
and local control 7 individual microclimate control devices
mental 36–7, 135 (IMCDs) 195–200
and productivity 4, 5–6, 13 see also environmentally responsive
self-assessment of 136, 145–7, 150, workstations (ERW)
157–9, 162 indoor air quality (IAQ) 110–11, 193
and stress 32, 79–80 factors defining 107
see also building sickness; well-being health effects 119–21, 334–5
Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 88 link with productivity 107–25
hidden figures task 248–50 local control of 195
high-frequency lighting 307 see also indoor environment
see also low-frequency flicker indoor environment
high-performance teams 342 economic loss associated with 93–4
Highway Code, signs from 231–3 policies 97–8
homes 19, 20–1, 187 and productivity 3–15
hours of working, changes in 81–2 case studies 141–3, 154–5
How Buildings Learn 338 quality see indoor air quality; indoor
HP (hypersensitivity pneumonitis) 112, environment quality
113, 119, 125 satisfaction with see indoor
human factors in self-rated environment satisfaction
questionnaires 136, 147, 148, 159, indoor environment quality (IEQ) 107
160 problems with the market for 94–7
humidity 73, 118, 315–16 protocols 97
HVAC systems 95, 119 see also indoor air quality
recommended improvements in 122, indoor environment satisfaction 132,
124 135, 144
upgrading to reduce costs 99–100, London case study 139, 140, 143,
101 148–50
see also air-conditioning; ventilation Maidenhead case study 152–3,
hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP) 112, 158–9, 161
113, 119, 125 information 230–4, 243–4
Appendix 355
information processing, conceptual killer variables, productivity and

framework for 53 167–89, 340–1
innovations in the Intelligent Workplace knowledge 23, 229, 240–1
276–9
innovators 325–6 laboratory, research see research
instinct 24 laboratory
instructions, symbols for 231–4 Latham Report 338
intelligent buildings layout, office 141, 154
KI building as 281 learning systems 279
meaning of 3 Le Corbusier 34
intelligent controls 279 letter cancellation task 250–1
Intelligent Workplace (IW) 272–80, 344 Lewis, John 327–8
intelligent workplaces 272–80, liberty 49, 340
295–303, 344 life energy 25
intention 20–1, 52 light 209–11
interference 246, 247, 339 daylight see daylight
International Performance and lighting 194–5, 207–18
Verification Protocol (IPMVP) 98, 99 effect on health 5–6
International Standard ISO7730 197, and energy conservation 75–6
199 guidelines for 217, 307
intervention local control 278
and mental fatigue 247, 248–53 and mood 58
for stress management 86–8 Lipton, Stuart 325–6
intuitive knowledge 23 litigation, indoor air quality and 114–15
involvement, decision-making and local control
266–71 and health 7
see also delegation; empowerment; in the Intelligent Workplace 278
users and job satisfaction 10
ioniser filters 316 see also individual control; personal
IPMVP (International Performance and control
Verification Protocol) 98, 99 London
IW see Intelligent Workplace (IW) Broadgate Office 325–6
case study 138–51
James-Lange theory 55–6 occupational density 182–3
Japan St Paul’s Cathedral 18
efficiency and effectiveness in 330–1 and window seats study 181
KI Building 281–93, 341–2 low-frequency flicker 210–11, 213
jobs see also high-frequency lighting
change in 80–3 luminance 223
satisfaction see job satisfaction
see also workplace Maidenhead, case study in 151–62
job satisfaction 132 management
and local control 10 demand side 98, 336, 346
in self-rated questionnaires 135 and employee relations 207–8
London case study 139, 140, 143, role in productivity 169
148–51 of stress see stress management
Maidenhead case study 152–3, see also managers
158–9, 161, 162 managers
and stress 131–2 building see building managers
joy 40–9, 340 design brief managers 341
involvement in design processes
KI Building 281–93, 341–2 259–71
356 Clements-Croome
manipulating supply and demand 329 fan, acceptable levels of 200–2

role ambiguity 82–3 masking 278, 293
and workgroup size 183–6 North America
see also management design brief managers in 341
manic-depressive illness, creativity and efficiency and effectiveness in 330
36–7 lighting in 194
market, indoor environment quality and Taylorist legacy in 323
94–7, 335, 346 see also United States
masking, sound 278, 293 NSF (National Science Foundation) 274
meaning, environmental 52–3, 62–3 numeric keypads, arrangement of
measurements 238–9
of concentration 339
of efficiency and effectiveness 331–2 OA (occupational asthma) 112, 113,
subjective 131, 134–6 119, 125
see also assessment; evaluation objective measures 130
mechanical ventilation obstacles, goals and 243–4
compared to natural ventilation 119, occupants
121 and environmental survey 137–8
see also air-conditioning; ventilation satisfaction see occupant satisfaction
medical effects see health see also users
Mediterranean countries 306, 309 occupant satisfaction 293
memories, emotion and 56 impact of environmentally responsive
mental effort 242–7, 338–9 workstations on 296–301
see also brain; concentration; KI building 342
thinking see also post-occupancy evaluation
mental fatigue 244–5, 246–7 occupational asthma (OA) 112, 113,
mental health 36–7, 135 119, 125
microclimate control see individual odour and smell 35
microclimate control devices see also fragrance environment
Mind Sports Olympiad 37 offices
mixed-mode buildings 187–8 building wellness categories, USA 118
modular construction 277 case studies
moods 58–9 Bristol 176–7
morale 24 good and bad examples 27–8
motivations, conflicts of 45 London 138–51
multi-sensory experience 34–6, 346 Maidenhead 151–62
music, biomusic 291–2 on ‘non-working’ 262–3
energy costs, USA 13–14
NASA, plants and 314, 317–18 environmentally responsive
National Science Foundation (NSF) 274 workstations research in 295–303
natural ventilation individual control in 192–205
comparisons 119, 121, 180, 344 intention, in building 21
at the Intelligent Workplace 277 killer variables 167–89
in mixed-mode buildings 187–8, 305 local control 173–5
preference for 305, 307 optimising the working environment
needs, hierarchy of 24 313–19
negative ions 316 resentment in 323–4
New Office, The 329 and workgroup size 183
night-time ventilation 74–5, 306 see also workplace
NMB Bank, Amsterdam 21–2 open landscapes 195
noise 174–5, 193, 195, 200–1 open-plan 174–5, 184–5, 195, 261
biomusic 291–2 optimisation of behaviour 47–8
Appendix 357
optimising the working environment privacy 75

313–19 procedural knowledge 229, 240–1
organisational perceptions 263–5 productivity 11, 345
organizational climate, changes to 84–5 analysis of 297–8
organizational structure 84–5 barriers to 336–7
impedes user involvement 260–1, 264 and computers, optimising 313–19
owners, building see building owners costs of 304
definitions of 208
Parry, Eric 325 and design 304–5, 334–8
part-time employment 81, 82 and environment 71, 342–3
patterns of employment 81–2 indoor 3–15
perception 53–4, 263–5 and environmentally responsive
imperceptible stimuli 54–5 workstations 296–301
see also organisational perceptions; gains from building improvements,
social perceptions USA 335–6
PerformA 310–12 and health, and daylight 5–6
performance impact of individual control 202–4
building see building performance and indoor air quality 107–25
human 227–41 definitions and methodology
measures for 129–31 107–8, 114
see also productivity losses through 93–4
performance contracting 98–9, 336, 346 research results 122–4
personal control 307, 343, 346 and the intelligent workplace
and productivity 172–6, 186–7, 340 295–303
case studies 143–5, 155–7, 161 killer variables 167–89
see also individual control; local measurement of 129–63, 319, 345
control case studies 141–5, 154–7
personalised workspace, restrictions on self-rated 140–1, 153–4, 161, 162
261, 262 offices, UK 173–5
Philippines, noise trade-off studies in and room temperatures 5
201–2 users, ignored 265
phototherapy 223 and well-being 36–8
physiological methods 130 and workgroup size 183
place 51, 63, 65–6 see also performance
see also space propositional knowledge 229
plants 314, 317–18 protocols, indoor environment quality
pleasure 40–9, 58, 340 97, 336, 346
POE see post-occupancy evaluation psyche, gender and 26–7
polarising filters 317 public policy 97–104
policy, public policy remedies 97–104 purpose, goal-directed behaviour and
positive affect theory 214–16 52
post-occupancy evaluation (POE) 286,
287–8, 289–91 quality see indoor air quality; indoor
see also occupants; users environment quality
posture, VDUs and 314–15, 337 questionnaires
practicality, performance measurement for assessment of productivity 132
and 129–30 design 134–6
preventative stress management London case study 138–51
strategies 86–8 Maidenhead case study 151–62
primary level interventions 86–7 limitations of 240
priorities, conflicting, in design 264–5 occupant 168, 170–1
priority factor analysis 147–51, 159–60 response to complaints 177–8
358 Clements-Croome
Tenant Questionnaire Survey see also music; noise

Assessment Method (TQSAM) space
298, 302 and affective appraisal 64–6
see also assessment; measurements expanding the notion of 51
see also place
relationships at work, change in 83 speed of work
reliability, performance measures and individual control and 202–4
129 see also productivity
religion see Buddhism; cathedrals; stimulation load approach 60–1
worship stimulus-response compatibility 234–9
research laboratory, Intelligent Stockley Park 325–6
Workplace as 272–80 stress 345
resentment 323–4 and activation and arousal 211
Responsible Workplace, The 329 adaptation to 319
responsiveness 176–80, 340, 346 in Britain 13
and productivity 187 and the changing nature of work
Rogers, Richard 325 77–89
roles, job 82–3 coping with 78–9
diagnosing 85–6
St Paul’s Cathedral 18
and emotions 62–3
satisfaction see job satisfaction;
and environmental stimulus 61–2
occupant satisfaction
and health 32
SBS see sick building syndrome (SBS)
and job satisfaction 131–2
SCANVAC 200
from machine noise 317
schemata 54
management see stress management
secondary level interventions 87–8
not building related 186
senses 29–38, 346
techno-stress 286–7, 341
and perception 53–4
and workload increase 80–1
and pleasure 40, 41–4
see also stressors
services, environmental 93–104
stress approach 61–2
sick building syndrome (SBS)
stress management 79–80, 345
ASHRAE position on 111
and change 334
causes of 12
strategies 86–8
carbon particulates 316
stressors 318, 319
environmental stressors 319
and lighting 211, 213
and computer staff 314
see also stress
USA research on 113, 114, 119
structure, organizational see
sickness see building sickness; health
organizational structure
signs, visual 231–9
subjective measurements 131, 134–6
skilled activities, characteristics of
supply chain relationships 269–70
229–30
supply and demand, linking 329–31
skilled manual work, effect of individual
support systems, floor-based 278
control on 202–4
sustainable architecture 275, 277
skills, nature of 228–30, 339
Sydney, mixed-mode buildings in 188
skin problems 317
symbols, visual 231–9
smell see odour and smell
system factors in self-rated
smoking restrictions 94, 100
questionnaires 136, 147–8, 149, 159,
social aspects of attitude 53
160–1, 162
social perceptions 263–5
systems, learning 279
solvents, allergic reaction to 308
systems thinking, architects and 328–9
SOM 325, 327
sound 35 task performance 130
Appendix 359
tasks for assessing mental fatigue total building performance 272–3, 344
248–54 see also building performance
taste, pleasure and 41–3 touch, importance of 36
Tavistock Institute 269 TQSAM see Tenant Questionnaire
Taylor, Frederick 324 Survey Assessment Method
Taylorism 323, 324 training 228–9, 230, 339
teams, high-performance 342 typing, effect of individual control on
see also workgroups 202–4
technology, new see computers
techno-stress 286–7, 341 United Kingdom
telecommunications in the Intelligent design in 187
Workplace 278 local control 173–5
temperatures preference for natural ventilation
acceptable variations in 305–6 305
body 41, 42–3, 44–5 productivity in 93, 173–5
and clothing 73–4 see also Britain
controlling with IMCDs 195–6 United States of America
as distraction 193–4 ASHRAE see ASHRAE
lack of agreements on 315 Carnegie Mellon University 272,
room 5 275–6, 343–4
see also thermal comfort Chicago, Andersen Worldwide 327–8
Tenant Questionnaire Survey energy costs of offices 13–14
Assessment Method (TQSAM) 298, environmentally responsive
302 workstations research in 295–303
tenants 94–5, 100–4 open landscapes and cubicles 195
terminology 170–1 productivity 93, 171
see also definitions gains from building improvements
tertiary level interventions 88 335–6
theory of concentration and attention and indoor air quality 107–25
242–54 Westinghouse Furniture Systems
thermal capacity, building 75 Company 9–10
thermal comfort 9, 44–5 see also North America
and energy conservation 72–5 US Department of Defense 274
and health and well-being 4, 5 US Department of Energy 98, 274, 336
and noise trade-off 201–2 US Environmental Protection Agency
personal control over 172–3 (USEPA) 93, 98, 274, 335, 336
see also temperatures USEPA see US Environmental Protection
thermal control Agency
estimating need for 197–200 users
and fan noise 200–2 lack of involvement 259, 329, 339–40
see also environmentally responsive organizational structure impedes
workstations; individual 260–1, 264
microclimate control devices needs ignored 265
thermal environment 281–5, 286, 343 performance criteria for 272–3
thinking right to influence design 263
effect of individual controls on 202–4 taking into account 240–1
poor quality of 338, 346 see also occupants; tenants
see also mental effort
Tokyo, KI Building 281–93 validity of performance measures 129
tools for future design 304–12 variables
top-down theories of perception 55 killer see killer variables
Torp, Niels 326 physical and psychological 239–40
360 Clements-Croome
VAV air diffuser 292 lack of, case study 260–1

VDUs see computers need for 34–5, 156–7
ventilation solar shading needed 194
comparisons 119, 121, 180, 344 to relieve fatigue 247
and energy policies 97–8 and user comfort and health 279–80
natural see natural ventilation users like 196
night-time 74–5, 306 see also daylight; view-out
see also air-conditioning; HVAC work
system buildings for 19
view-out 193, 194 change in see change
see also windows and concentration 338–40
visibility 209–10 satisfaction with 37–8
vision 209–11, 315 see also job satisfaction
visual consciousness 30, 31–2 workers see employees
visual symbols 231–9 workgroups 183–6, 340, 341, 346
see also teams
Waterside (building) 326–7, 332 working, new ways of 323–33,
well-being 345
and productivity 36–8 workload 80–1, 130–1
case studies 141–3, 150, 151, workplace
154–5, 162–3 attention, and performance 227–41
scales of 37 change in 80–5
and the senses 29–38 comfort and health in 145–7, 157–9
and thermal comfort 4, 5 and creativity 18–28
users, ignored 265 future of, and environmental design
wellness categories, building see 342–5
building wellness categories individual control at 192–205
West Bend Mutual insurance company intelligent see intelligent workplace
204 lighting in 207–18
Westinghouse Furniture Systems mental effort and fatigue in 245
Company 9–10 options for the management of stress
windows 86
and avoiding eye-strain 193 see also buildings; offices
design of 306–7 workspaces, diversifying 292
at the Intelligent Workplace 277 worship, buildings for 18–19
View publication stats

DerekClements Croome. Creatingtheproductiveworkplace EFNSpon2000.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DerekClements Croome. Creatingtheproductiveworkplace EFNSpon2000.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Creating the Productive Workplace

Book · January 2000

Intelligent Liveable Cities View project

Transdisciplinary Workplace Research Network View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Bill Bordass Derek Clements- Michel Cabanac

Derek Clements-Croome is Professor of Construction Engineering in the Department of

Edited by Derek Clements-Croome

London and New York

Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada

This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2001.

E & FN Spon is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication Data

ISBN 0–419–23690–2 (Print Edition)

List of figures xii

1 Indoor environment and productivity 3

2 Creativity in the workplace 18

3 Consciousness, well-being and the senses 29

The nature of consciousness 30

4 Pleasure and joy, and their role in human life 40

The behavioural final common path 40

From pleasure and comfort to joy and happiness 45

5 Emotion and the environment: the forgotten dimension 51

6 A broad definition of comfort as an aid to meeting

7 Stress and the changing nature of work 77

Tertiary level interventions – curative stress management

8 The economics of enhanced environmental services in buildings 93

Magnitude of economic loss associated with poor indoor

9 Assessment of link between productivity and indoor air quality 107

10 Assessment and measurement of productivity 129

The analytic hierarchy process 132

11 Productivity in buildings: the ‘killer’ variables 167

12 Individual control at each workplace: the means and the

13 Creating high-quality workplaces using lighting 207

14 Attention and performance in the workplace 227

The nature of skills 228

15 Concentration and attention: new directions in theory and

16 Managerial and employee involvement in design processes 259

The problem 259

The case of a great building that does not work 262

17 The Intelligent Workplace: a research laboratory 272

Total building performance 272

18 Air-conditioning systems of the KI Building, Tokyo 281

Special systems 281

19 Employee productivity and the intelligent workplace 295

Towards an ERW research agenda 295

20 Future design – guidelines and tools 304

Comfort temperatures 305

21 Optimising the working environment 313

A legacy of resentment 323

Appendix. Creating the Productive Workplace: Summary of

Can we design for productivity? 334

1.1 Factors which affect productivity 11

10.4 Personal control over temperature 144

14.8 Door latch, British Rail InterCity toilets 238

1.1 Characteristics of brain rhythms 3

10.14 Self-projected possible improvements in productivity

Bill Bordass Principal, William Bordass Associates, London

Adrian Leaman Principal, Building Use Studies Ltd, London

by Nick Raynsford MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State

Council; Construction Industry Environmental Forum; De Montfort University (Department